Antonio Villafranca , Igor Tasic , Victor Gallegos , Almudena Gimenez , Jesus Ochoa Rego , Juan Antonio Fernandez , Maria-Dolores Cano
{"title":"比较区块链和DAG技术在智能农业可追溯性方面的效率和延迟","authors":"Antonio Villafranca , Igor Tasic , Victor Gallegos , Almudena Gimenez , Jesus Ochoa Rego , Juan Antonio Fernandez , Maria-Dolores Cano","doi":"10.1016/j.simpat.2025.103131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLT), such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG), are being positioned as a promising solution for smart agriculture by enabling secure, decentralized, and transparent traceability systems. However, these technologies face challenges related to scalability, latency, and efficiency in IoT environments. In this study, we conduct a comparative analysis of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and DAG technologies through extensive simulations, varying transaction generation rates and network latencies. A key methodological innovation of this research is the detailed codification of agricultural data transactions, encompassing parameters such as crop type, fertilization, harvesting, and transportation, enabling a structured and scalable approach to data representation. Our results reveal that Bitcoin's robustness is hindered by its high sensitivity to latency and network load, with inclusion times exceeding 700 s. Ethereum demonstrates better adaptability, with controlled inclusion times ranging from 12.91 to 35.76 s under varying conditions. DAG outperforms both, achieving significantly lower inclusion times between 4.27 and 22.25 s, highlighting its suitability for real-time applications. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to provide a direct comparison of these technologies in the context of agricultural traceability, showcasing the advantages and limitations of DAG-based systems for managing and scaling agricultural IoT networks.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49518,"journal":{"name":"Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory","volume":"142 ","pages":"Article 103131"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing blockchain and DAG technologies for smart agriculture traceability in terms of efficiency and latency\",\"authors\":\"Antonio Villafranca , Igor Tasic , Victor Gallegos , Almudena Gimenez , Jesus Ochoa Rego , Juan Antonio Fernandez , Maria-Dolores Cano\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.simpat.2025.103131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLT), such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG), are being positioned as a promising solution for smart agriculture by enabling secure, decentralized, and transparent traceability systems. However, these technologies face challenges related to scalability, latency, and efficiency in IoT environments. In this study, we conduct a comparative analysis of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and DAG technologies through extensive simulations, varying transaction generation rates and network latencies. A key methodological innovation of this research is the detailed codification of agricultural data transactions, encompassing parameters such as crop type, fertilization, harvesting, and transportation, enabling a structured and scalable approach to data representation. Our results reveal that Bitcoin's robustness is hindered by its high sensitivity to latency and network load, with inclusion times exceeding 700 s. Ethereum demonstrates better adaptability, with controlled inclusion times ranging from 12.91 to 35.76 s under varying conditions. DAG outperforms both, achieving significantly lower inclusion times between 4.27 and 22.25 s, highlighting its suitability for real-time applications. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to provide a direct comparison of these technologies in the context of agricultural traceability, showcasing the advantages and limitations of DAG-based systems for managing and scaling agricultural IoT networks.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory\",\"volume\":\"142 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103131\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569190X25000668\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569190X25000668","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing blockchain and DAG technologies for smart agriculture traceability in terms of efficiency and latency
Distributed Ledger Technologies (DLT), such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG), are being positioned as a promising solution for smart agriculture by enabling secure, decentralized, and transparent traceability systems. However, these technologies face challenges related to scalability, latency, and efficiency in IoT environments. In this study, we conduct a comparative analysis of Bitcoin, Ethereum, and DAG technologies through extensive simulations, varying transaction generation rates and network latencies. A key methodological innovation of this research is the detailed codification of agricultural data transactions, encompassing parameters such as crop type, fertilization, harvesting, and transportation, enabling a structured and scalable approach to data representation. Our results reveal that Bitcoin's robustness is hindered by its high sensitivity to latency and network load, with inclusion times exceeding 700 s. Ethereum demonstrates better adaptability, with controlled inclusion times ranging from 12.91 to 35.76 s under varying conditions. DAG outperforms both, achieving significantly lower inclusion times between 4.27 and 22.25 s, highlighting its suitability for real-time applications. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to provide a direct comparison of these technologies in the context of agricultural traceability, showcasing the advantages and limitations of DAG-based systems for managing and scaling agricultural IoT networks.
期刊介绍:
The journal Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory provides a forum for original, high-quality papers dealing with any aspect of systems simulation and modelling.
The journal aims at being a reference and a powerful tool to all those professionally active and/or interested in the methods and applications of simulation. Submitted papers will be peer reviewed and must significantly contribute to modelling and simulation in general or use modelling and simulation in application areas.
Paper submission is solicited on:
• theoretical aspects of modelling and simulation including formal modelling, model-checking, random number generators, sensitivity analysis, variance reduction techniques, experimental design, meta-modelling, methods and algorithms for validation and verification, selection and comparison procedures etc.;
• methodology and application of modelling and simulation in any area, including computer systems, networks, real-time and embedded systems, mobile and intelligent agents, manufacturing and transportation systems, management, engineering, biomedical engineering, economics, ecology and environment, education, transaction handling, etc.;
• simulation languages and environments including those, specific to distributed computing, grid computing, high performance computers or computer networks, etc.;
• distributed and real-time simulation, simulation interoperability;
• tools for high performance computing simulation, including dedicated architectures and parallel computing.