## 4 Nazzfast Consensus Mechanism
### Block Creation Cycle
#### 4.4.1 Block Proposal Phase
Our presented consensus used a reduced number of validators by using an election mechanism to accelerate the consensus process. Below, we compare our work with the consensus that lies under the same family of Tendermint and with other major consensus available in the network. _Comparison with the Same Family of Consensus_

The EOS.IO uses a voting mechanism to select block producers and PBFT for block finalization. EOS.IO was presented by [PERSON] in 2017 [98]. The EOS.IO software (v.1.0.0.) (block.one) used the DPoS [99] algorithm for the block creation process. They used a voting mechanism to select 21 block producers for one round to create blocks. Block producers encourage token holders to vote for them, such as offering rewards or attractions to give them a vote, or using many other ways. The selected block producers produced blocks in a round-robin fashion. The EOS used PBFT (Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance)-style consensus for block finalization. Every block goes through the commit and pre-commit phases to decide the validity of the block. The block also required 15 other block producers to sign the block for finalization. The EOS.IO produces blocks every 0.5 s. If the block has not been produced, a 0.5 s gap in the blockchain network is observed. Our presented consensus used the swapping mechanism to reduce the time gap and select new block producers. We have already discussed the comparison of Tendermint with Nazfast consensus in the discussion section. Quorum IBFT [16] means IBFT consensus used for the Quorum blockchain. IBFT has a higher throughput than PBFT. However, it has many issues, such as centralization due to validators, because of the dynamic set of validators in the system, and network management becomes challenging. We also used the block creation committee that changes after two rounds; therefore, we saved the election result in the main chain and used Sea Shield for complete details. Avalanche [9] consensus used the gossip protocol with a repeated random sampling method. Each node uses a subset of validators from the network to confirm the state of the transaction. Due to this, it leads to centralization issues in the network. However, it has a good throughput. In our system, we provide improved decentralization in our consensus. Hyperledger Fabric [100] used the PBFT approach. It used a leader and multiple phases to commit a block. Due to the BFT approach, it has a high communication overhead and low scalability. We solve these issues in our consensus by providing high throughput with less communication overhead. Stellar (FBFT) [17] is a blockchain network that uses FBFT consensus. The FBFT consensus is also based on the BFT concept. The consensus faces issues like governance and centralization risks. In our presented consensus, we try to overcome these issues. _Overall Comparison with Other Consensus_

Casper consensus has two versions. Casper friendly finality gadget [101] and Casper the correct by construction [102]. In the initial case, the Casper FFG used PoS with Pow style for block finalization, but later in CBC, it became completely PoS. Casper FFG has slower block production compared with other networks. However, Casper CBC hasimproved the block production rate. However, our presented consensus has a higher throughput than Casper's. Polkadot [8] used a parachain model. It has a relay chain (main chain). Consensus has been achieved in the main chain. It also has many parachains. Parachains are individual blockchains that run parallel to the main chain. It is considered an improved consensus. However, it has issues such as centralization and governance complexity. We solve all these in our consensus with improved throughput. Algorand [96] used a cryptographic sortation mechanism to select the leaders for block creation. It provides instant finality to the transactions. Due to the sortation mechanism, fewer coinage validators have a lower chance of participating in the consensus. However, we provide fewer coinage validators to participate in the mechanism.