Byzantine Agreement with Predictors: Resilience Trade-offs Characterized
A new paper on arXiv (2605.19452) presents a complete characterization of the trade-off between consistency and robustness in Byzantine Agreement when nodes have access to a predictor that flags potentially faulty nodes. The authors provide algorithms and impossibility results for both non-authenticated and authenticated settings. For n nodes and parameter α ∈ [0,1], their algorithms tolerate up to α·n faulty nodes when the predictor is correct (consistency) and up to (1-α)/2·n - 1 faulty nodes when the predictor is arbitrarily wrong (robustness). In the authenticated setting, the robustness bound improves to (1-α)·n - 1. These trade-offs are proven tight.
Key facts
- Paper studies Byzantine Agreement with a predictor that flags suspicious nodes.
- Focus is on algorithmic resilience depending on predictor accuracy.
- Complete characterization of consistency–robustness trade-offs is provided.
- Non-authenticated setting: consistency up to α·n, robustness up to (1-α)/2·n - 1.
- Authenticated setting: robustness improves to (1-α)·n - 1.
- Trade-offs are shown to be exactly tight.
- Paper is on arXiv with ID 2605.19452.
- Authors present both algorithms and impossibility results.
Entities
Institutions
- arXiv