Cover
Vol. 22 No. 1 (2026)

Published: June 15, 2026

Pages: 209-217

Original Article

TI-PBFT: Improved Practical Byzantian Fault Tolerance Consensus Mechanism Based on ID-Trust Algorithm

Sajad Hussien Faleh 1 Dheyaa Jasim Kadhim 1
1 Department of Electrical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq
History
  • Received: March 23, 2024
  • Revised: April 29, 2024
  • Accepted: June 1, 2024
  • Available Online: June 15, 2026
DOI

https://doi.org/10.37917/ijeee.22.1.19

Abstract

Blockchain innovation is gaining attention in fields like monetary exchange, edge computing, medical care, and datasecurity. Consortium chains, using lightweight consensus algorithms like PBFT, offer alternatives to proof-based mechanisms while maintaining decentralization, security, and scalability. However, it also has some limitations and challenges that need to be addressed to improve its performance and scalability. PBFT is a classical algorithm with high complexity due to three-stage broadcasting and arbitrary selection of master nodes. Its communication efficiency is low, and scalability issues arise when nodes are large, causing significant delays and performance degradation in unstable networks. Furthermore, the requirement for every node to bundle, check, and broadcast the exchange list in the pre-prepared, prepared and commit stages diminishes the efficiency of consensus and performance between nodes and comes down on network correspondence. The research proposes a new methodology for the consensus algorithm, focusing on high-trust nodes to protect the network from malicious actors and reducing computational overhead and latency by eliminating Byzantian nodes and grouping the remaining nodes into groups, each of which has a main node selected based on a higher trust score. According to the results, the suggested methodology leads to significant improvements in communication complexity and Byzantine fault tolerance compared to standard PBFT networks and previous works. This indicates a substantial enhancement in network efficiency and scalability, offering promising prospects for blockchain applications in various fields.

Keywords

References

  1. S. Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system,” 2008.
  2. Z. Zheng, S. Xie, H. Dai, X. Chen, and H. Wang, “An overview of blockchain technology: Architecture, consensus, and future trends,” in 2017 IEEE international congress on big data (BigData congress), pp. 557–564, Ieee, 2017.
  3. J. A. Abdulsaheb and D. J. Kadhim, “Classical and heuristic approaches for mobile robot path planning: A survey,” Robotics, vol. 12, no. 4, p. 93, 2023.
  4. R. A. Falih, Y. Y. B. Jusoh, and D. J. Khadhim, “New research trends in designing e-government architecture based on blockchain technology,” Journal of Engineering, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 17–36, 2023.
  5. Z. H. Jaber, D. J. Kadhim, and A. S. Al-Araji, “Medium access control protocol design for wireless communications and networks review,” Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng, vol. 12, p. 1711, 2022.
  6. S. King and S. Nadal, “Ppcoin: Peer-to-peer cryptocurrency with proof-of-stake,” self-published paper, August, vol. 19, no. 1, 2012.
  7. D. Larimer, “Delegated proof-of-stake (dpos),” Bitshare whitepaper, vol. 81, p. 85, 2014.
  8. L. Lamport, “Paxos made simple,” ACM SIGACT News (Distributed Computing Column) 32, 4 (Whole Number 121, December 2001), pp. 51–58, 2001.
  9. M. Castro, B. Liskov, et al., “Practical byzantine fault tolerance,” in OsDI, vol. 99, pp. 173–186, 1999.
  10. G. Moad, E. Rizzardo, and S. H. Thang, “Living radical polymerization by the raft process,” Australian journal of chemistry, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 379–410, 2005.
  11. W. Li, C. Feng, L. Zhang, H. Xu, B. Cao, and M. A. Imran, “A scalable multi-layer pbft consensus for blockchain,” IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 1146–1160, 2020.
  12. X. Zheng, W. Feng, M. Huang, and S. Feng, “Optimization of pbft algorithm based on improved c4. 5,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2021, pp. 1–7, 2021.
  13. W. Zhong, X. Zheng, W. Feng, M. Huang, and S. Feng, “Improve pbft based on hash ring,” Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, vol. 2021, pp. 1–9, 2021.
  14. S. Tang, Z.Wang, J. Jiang, S. Ge, and G. Tan, “Improved pbft algorithm for high-frequency trading scenarios of alliance blockchain,” Scientific Reports, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 4426, 2022.
  15. S. Liu, R. Zhang, C. Liu, C. Xu, and J. Wang, “An improved pbft consensus algorithm based on grouping and credit grading,” Scientific Reports, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 13030, 2023.
  16. W. Liu, X. Zhang, W. Feng, M. Huang, and Y. Xu, “Optimization of pbft algorithm based on qos-aware trust service evaluation,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 12, p. 4590, 2022.
  17. Y. Wang, M. Zhong, and T. Cheng, “Research on pbft consensus algorithm for grouping based on feature trust,” Scientific Reports, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 12515, 2022.
  18. W. Jiang, X. Wu, M. Song, J. Qin, and Z. Jia, “Improved pbft algorithm based on comprehensive evaluation model,” Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 2, p. 1117, 2023.
  19. Z. Tan, X. Wang, X. Wang, et al., “A novel iterative and dynamic trust computing model for large scaled p2p networks,” Mobile Information Systems, vol. 2016, 2016.