Traditional rollup-based designs rely on commodity validators to verify transactions, but high-throughput verification (1Gb/s) exceeds the capabilities of most nodes. Posting such data on Layer 1 (L1) is bandwidth-intensive and costly. InfiniSVM addresses these challenges with a Proof-of-Authority-and-Stake (PoAS) model that combines sequencer-led verification, distributed proof generation, and fallback security on Solana.


​
PoA&S Consensus Model

InfiniSVM introduces a sequencer-driven model where transactions are batched into shreds, each containing:

  • Slot number & transaction vector
  • Version metadata for accessed accounts
  • Linkage hashes for state continuity

Only a minimal (Effect Hash, Shred Hash) pair is posted on Solana, ensuring data availability while avoiding L1 congestion.


​
Transaction Verification & Voting Mechanism

Upon receiving a shred, a prover follows a two-step validation process:

  1. State Reconstruction & Effect Hash Verification

    • The prover checks account versions.
    • If missing state, the prover requests shreds from the sequencer.
    • The prover re-executes transactions to derive an effect hash.
    • If the computed hash matches the shred’s embedded effect hash, the prover votes for acceptance.

  2. Majority Vote Finalization

    • A 51% vote is required to mark a shred as finalized.
    • If all previous shreds are finalized, the sequencer assembles proof for the block.

​
Handling Malicious Sequencers & Fault Tolerance

  • Malicious Proposer Detection

    • Honest provers detect invalid transactions via effect hash mismatches and vote against them.
    • If the sequencer repeatedly submits invalid shreds, it is marked as offline.
    • Failover to a backup sequencer occurs via PoA voting on Solana.

  • Censorship Resistance

    • If the sequencer ignores transactions, users can force inclusion by submitting transactions directly to Solana.

​
Efficient Prover Selection & Incentives

To prevent hardware-intensive requirements for provers:

  • The sequencer uses a round-robin method to select 2/3 of online provers.
  • Subdivided verification tasks allow provers to distribute workload across multiple nodes.
  • Elastic cloud scaling allows provers to handle surges in verification demand.

Prover reward structure:

  • Earn fees from processed shreds and inflationary $LAYER rewards.
  • Malicious or inactive provers face slashing:
    • 1st violation: Loss of epoch fees.
    • 2nd violation: 1% slash on staked tokens.
    • Subsequent violations: 5% stake slash per offense.

The PoAS model in InfiniSVM achieves:

  • Scalable, high-throughput consensus without overloading L1.
  • Efficient, decentralized validation via sequencer-led voting.
  • Robust security with fallback mechanisms on Solana.

By optimizing prover participation, reducing L1 bandwidth costs, and ensuring censorship resistance, InfiniSVM scales consensus while maintaining decentralization and integrity.

Was this page helpful?