# Enhanced Scalability and Security in Blockchain-Based Transportation Systems for Mass Gatherings
## 4 Results and Findings
### Comparing the Cost of the Proposed System with Other References
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**References No.** & **Scenario** & **Throughput (TPS)** & **Latency (s)** & **Cost (USD)** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Our System} & Baseline & 800 & 5 & \$50,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2500 & 2 & \$60,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3500 & 1.5 & \$75,000 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[33]} & Baseline & 750 & 6 & \$40,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2300 & 3 & \$45,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3300 & 2 & \$55,000 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[34]} & Baseline & 800 & 5 & \$42,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2400 & 2.5 & \$48,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3400 & 1.8 & \$58,000 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[35]} & Baseline & 700 & 5.5 & \$38,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2200 & 3.2 & \$43,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3100 & 2.2 & \$53,000 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[36]} & Baseline & 770 & 6.2 & \$41,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2350 & 3.1 & \$47,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3250 & 2.3 & \$57,000 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[37]} & Baseline & 800 & 5.2 & \$42,500 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2450 & 2.7 & \$48,500 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3400 & 1.9 & \$58,500 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[38]} & Baseline & 790 & 5.4 & \$41,500 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2400 & 3 & \$47,500 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3350 & 2 & \$57,500 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[39]} & Baseline & 780 & 5.6 & \$41,200 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2500 & 2.8 & \$48,000 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3250 & 2.1 & \$57,200 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[40]} & Baseline & 760 & 6.1 & \$40,800 \\ \cline{2-5}  & State Channels & 2300 & 3.3 & \$46,500 \\ \cline{2-5}  & Rollups & 3100 & 2.4 & \$56,500 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Comparing the cost of the proposed system with other references. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Scenario** & **Through-** & **Latency** & **Total** & **Change in** & **Change in** & **Transaction** & **Infrastructure** & **Security** & **Scalability** \\  & **put (TPS)** & **Cost** & **Cost** & **Through-** & **Cost Coefficient** & **Cost Coefficient** & **Overhead** & **Cost (Scalability)** \\ \hline Proposed & & & & & & & & \\ System (Baseline) & 800 & 5 & 50,000 & - & - & - & 62.5 & - & - \\ \hline State & 2500 & 2 & 60,000 & 10,000 & 1700 & 5,88 & 62.5 & 10,000 & - \\ \hline Rollups & 3500 & 1.5 & 75,000 & 15,000 & 1000 & 15 & 62.5 & 10,000 & 15,000 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Coefficients and detailed cost calculations. The cost (USD) chart shows a fatal flaw in our system (the baseline) in comparison with State Channels and Rollups. The Rollups and State Channels are associated with a promise of increased throughput and decreased latency; however, despite this, the cost of their usage is also increased. Take, for example, Rollups whose prices vary between USD 55,000 and USD 75,000, which may be excessive for an application with a smaller budget. Approximately in the middle, State Channels require a cost of between USD 45,000 and USD 60,000. Compared to the Baseline, which ranges from USD 38,000 to USD 42,500, our offering is more affordable and cost-effective, making it a reasonable choice in terms of performance. The cost advantage establishes our Baseline model as the most affordable option when cost is a key consideration. As demonstrated in the throughput (TPS) chart, Rollups lead the charts in raw performance, achieving up to 3500 TPS, followed by State Channels, which have a Throughput between 2200 and 2500 TPS. These numbers, however, are priced high. Though the Baseline scenario does not offer the same throughput as the other scenarios, with approximately 700 to 800 TPS, it can still be used to provide acceptable performance on various applications. This is why the Baseline can be an effective solution in situations where intensive throughput is not a priority, but cost efficiency and budget limitations are paramount.