# CrossDeFi: A Novel Cross-Chain Communication Protocol
## 8 Evaluation
### Experimental Evaluation  
The asset transfer efficiency of the CrossDeFi system is influenced by network conditions and the specific blockchain technologies employed. This subsection compares the asset transfer accuracy (ATA) and transfer delay (TD) metrics of CrossDeFi (CD) with several existing cross-chain solutions, including Polkadot (Pol) [41], Cosmos (CoS) [45], hash-locking (HL) [51], rotary mechanism (NM) [48], sidechain or relay (SR) [49], and asset transfer protocol (AT) [50].  
Figure 7 and Table 9 illustrate the ATA results for seven cross-chain solutions, including CrossDeFi, with the number of users varying from 20 to 100. As the number of users increases, CrossDeFi exhibits a decrease in ATA due to potential errors or delays caused by strained network conditions. Although CrossDeFi prevents asset loss due to security breaches, some losses occur due to network congestion. Asset transfers might fail owing to insufficient gas fees, or they might be significantly delayed during periods of high network congestion. For example, ATA rates for CrossDeFi are 99.6% with 20 users and decrease to 96% with 100 users. Here, the asset transfer loss is 0.4% and 4%, respectively. Despite this decline, CrossDeFi achieves notably higher ATA compared to the six other solutions. This superior performance is attributed to CrossDeFi's unique miner and bridge selection mechanisms, which incorporate multiple criteria based on blockchain type and network conditions. These mechanisms enhance asset transfer accuracy without adversely affecting speed, transaction fees, user experience, or security. Notably, CrossDeFi improves ATA by 4.1%, 5.3%, 8.6%, 7.3%, 9.6%, and 5.6% compared to Pol, CoS, HL, NM, SR, and ATP, respectively.  
Figure 8 and Table 10 compare TD across the same set of cross-chain solutions as user numbers increase. This TD is estimated by the summation of both transfer time and transfer confirmation time. CrossDeFi shows an incremental delay from 25.6 s with 20 users to 72.5 s with 100 users. Despite this increase, CrossDeFi consistently maintains lower delays compared to its competitors. This efficiency is largely due to its optimized miner and asset-specific bridge selection algorithms, which effectively reduce delays and transaction fees while enhancing security. The asset-specific bridges selected by CrossDeFi significantly boost transfer speeds and ensure timely delivery of transfer confirmation messages, leading  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Number of Users**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**ATA (\%)**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & **CD** & **Pol** & **CoS** & **HL** & **NM** & **SR** & **ATP** \\ \hline
20 & 99.6 & 98.2 & 98.5 & 98 & 97.6 & 97 & 98.3 \\
40 & 99.3 & 97.6 & 98 & 96.2 & 96.3 & 95.3 & 97.5 \\
60 & 99.15 & 96.5 & 97.2 & 94.1 & 94.2 & 93.1 & 96.8 \\
80 & 98.9 & 94.2 & 96.5 & 93.1 & 93.8 & 91.4 & 95.2 \\
100 & 96 & 92.1 & 91.3 & 88.6 & 89.3 & 87.6 & 91.6 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 9: Asset transfer accuracy (ATA) across different networks with varying numbers of users.  
Figure 7: ATA across various cross-chain solutions as a function of user count.  
to improved asset transfer rates. For instance, delays observed for CrossDeFi, Pol, CoS, HL, NM, SR, and ATP are 72.5 s, 102.6 s, 145.7 s, 160.1 s, 170.9 s, 165.8 s, and 140.4 s, respectively, for scenarios with 100 users.  
In conclusion, the experimental evaluation of CrossDeFi illustrates its superior performance in terms of asset transfer accuracy and transfer delay compared to established cross-chain solutions. The system's unique selection mechanisms for miners and bridges, tailored to specific blockchain conditions and network demands, enhance its operational efficiency and interoperability of diversified assets. These results underscore CrossDeFi's potential to significantly improve cross-chain asset transfers in real-world DeFi applications, promising enhanced user experiences and heightened security.