Comments: the Satoshi effect - Bitcoin paper success against the academic review system

lists lots of papers winning awards in CS.

Posted by Best papers awards at November 26, 2015 04:40 PM

Peer-to-Peer Review: The State of Academic Bitcoin Research 2015

PEER-REVIEW
I've updated my epic BITCOIN ACADEMIC PAPER DATABASE by adding over 280 new papers that were published in 2015. You can download it, and I've also included a link to a separate Google doc where you can make suggestions for papers that might have been missed.

If you'd like to read about how I've built the database and the sources I've used, check out my piece about it from last year. Don't expect it to be perfect - there are omissions and the citations are not always error-free - but it's a pretty comprehensive start for anyone looking to embark on furthering the state of knowledge on Bitcoin, cryptocurrency and blockchain more generally.

The quality of papers is... um... variable and obviously I haven't had a chance to actually read most of them (as there are now over 550 in total), so don't be surprised if some are not as 'academic' or robust as you might like. That said, the quality of papers has - in general - improved over the last year. For the record, the basic definition of 'academic' in this context is: showing signs of a systematic research and analysis process that extends beyond just ranting, idle speculation or marketing. Note, though, that this does not narrow it to bland positivist (social) science. High quality and high effort philosophical, 'non-scientific' and even partisan political explorations are considered valid.
...

Posted by Suitpossom at January 13, 2016 06:06 PM

Bitcoin academic papers published in:
2008: Bitcoin Whitepaper
2010: 1
2011: 8
2012: 21
2013: 64
2014: 217
2015: 288

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VaWhbAj7hWNdiE73P-W-wrl5a0WNgzjofmZXe0Rh5sg/edit#gid=0

Posted by Bitcoin papers published by year at January 13, 2016 06:38 PM

This whole Bitcoin thing is a giant conspiracy to me.

SOMEONE wants to know if the particular hash algorithm on which it is based is crackable, and SOMEONE will not believe the answer unless a lot of (other people's) money is put at stake on the answer.

SHA256 hash iterated for a second time in such a strange manner as almost to weaken it. Very strange. There is something else that SOMEONE wants to crack.

Posted by Honey Bee XCIX at January 27, 2017 11:58 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Hit Preview to see your comment.
MT::App::Comments=HASH(0x55cc7d012f60) Subroutine MT::Blog::SUPER::site_url redefined at /home/iang/www/fc/cgi-bin/mt/lib/MT/Object.pm line 125.