# AI-Driven Optimization of Blockchain Scalability, Security, and Privacy Protection
Nowadays, blockchain has been applied across various fields, including finance [13], agriculture [14], food [15], supply chain management [16], and healthcare. For instance, in food safety traceability, consortium blockchain enables real-time data sharing and collaborative mechanisms, addressing challenges such as information asymmetry and the complexity of traditional traceability processes. This not only enhances the efficiency of food safety traceability but also reduces labor and time costs. Despite the promising prospects of blockchain technology, it still faces numerous challenges. * Scalability Issues: Due to the inherent limitations of block size and the time-consuming consensus process, blockchain networks struggle with transaction throughput and data storage constraints. These factors significantly limit the efficiency and feasibility of large-scale applications. The scalability challenges faced by common consensus algorithms in blockchain are shown in Table 1.
* Security Risks: The widely used PoW consensus mechanism requires multiple block confirmations--typically at least six--to probabilistically ensure transaction security, leading to delays in finalizing transactions. Moreover, if a single entity gains control of more than 51% of the total network computing power, it could launch a double-spending attack or maliciously fork the blockchain, posing severe threats to the integrity and security of the system. The security issues faced by common consensus algorithms in blockchain are shown in Table 2.
* Privacy Protection Challenges: While blockchain provides a certain degree of anonymity, it is not immune to privacy risks. For instance, attackers can analyze transaction histories and trace network node IP addresses to infer users' identities. Additionally, improper implementation of decentralized applications (DApps) may lead to unintended exposure of sensitive data, exacerbating privacy concerns and further complicating regulatory compliance. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt}} \hline \hline
**Consensus Algorithm** & **Main Security Issues** & **Description** \\ \hline PoW & Low Throughput, High Energy Consumption & Block creation is limited by difficulty; TPS is low and hard to scale \\ \hline PoS & Node Centralization, Sync Dependency & Requires up-to-date state sync; less suitable for large distributed systems \\ \hline DPoS & Limited by Supernodes & Faster than PoW/PoS, but scalability is constrained by limited node participation \\ \hline PBFT & O(n\({}^{\wedge}\)2) Message Complexity & High communication overhead; performance degrades with increasing node count \\ \hline RAFT & Poor State Sync for Many Nodes & Suitable for small-scale systems only; does not scale well \\ \hline Paxos & Complex Implementation, Performance Bottleneck & Multi-phase protocol has high latency and poor scalability \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Scalability issues of common consensus algorithms. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt} p{113.8 pt}} \hline \hline
**Consensus Algorithm** & **Main Security Issues** & **Description** \\ \hline PoW & 51\% Attack, Selfish Mining & A single entity controlling 51\% of total hash power can manipulate the blockchain; selfish mining leads to temporary forks \\ \hline PoS & Rich-get-richer, Long-range Attack, Nothing at Stake & Stake centralization increases over time; easy to rewrite chain history; validators may vote on multiple forks \\ \hline DPoS & Centralization Risk, Vote Manipulation & A few supernodes control consensus; voting power can be bought or manipulated \\ \hline PBFT & Node Exposure, DoS Attacks & Small node sets are vulnerable to targeted DoS; limited fault tolerance (up to f faulty nodes) \\ \hline RAFT & Not Byzantine Fault Tolerant & Cannot defend against malicious nodes; only tolerates crash faults in trusted environments \\ \hline Paxos & Weak Byzantine Resistance & Assumes honest behavior; not suitable against data forgery or malicious attacks \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}