Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41430145›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

A scalable post quantum secure blockchain framework with adaptive time consensus in cloud environments.

M Velmurugan, M Rajeev Kumar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

M VelmuruganDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Vel Tech Rangarajan Dr. Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai, 600062, Tamil Nadu, India. vtd1037@veltech.edu.in.
M Rajeev KumarDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Vel Tech Rangarajan Dr. Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai, 600062, Tamil Nadu, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blockchain deployments continue to face challenges related to scalability, energy consumption, and susceptibility of classical cryptographic primitives to emerging quantum attacks. Conventional systems employing RSA or DSA signatures and consensus mechanisms such as Proof of Work (PoW) or Proof of Stake (PoS) incur substantial computational overhead and are not well suited for cloud-scale execution. This study presents PQ-PoETChain, a post-quantum-secure blockchain model integrating NTRU-based signatures, an adaptive Proof of Elapsed Time (PoET) protocol executed within Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs), and a Lightweight Hash Validation (LHV) mechanism. The framework was implemented in Python and evaluated in a controlled simulation environment using 50-1000 nodes, with repeated trials to measure variability across throughput, latency, and energy metrics. NTRU demonstrated sub-2 ms signature operations, while the adaptive PoET configuration reduced consensus delay under load-dependent conditions. Across multiple experimental runs, the system achieved an average throughput of ~ 195 TPS with a latency of 189 ± 4 ms at 500 nodes. Energy consumption reduced by up to 91.8% (± 1.6%) when compared with PoW under identical conditions. LHV further lowered verification cost by replacing Merkle-tree traversal with constant-time hash-pointer validation. Results indicate that PQ-PoETChain offers a balanced combination of quantum-resilient security and improved performance characteristics suitable for cloud-native and large-scale deployments.

Indexed as

BlockchainHash chain validationNTRU encryptionProof of elapsed timeQuantum cryptography

Identifiers

PMID41430145
PMCPMC12749202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.