Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Empirical Evaluation of Blockchain Smart Contracts

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Decentralised Internet of Things

Part of the book series: Studies in Big Data ((SBD,volume 71))

Abstract

One of the building blocks of our legal and economic systems in society is the indispensable reliance on contracts and trust systems to protect individual rights. Recently smart contracts are becoming prominent parts of various blockchain platforms. The goal of smart contracts is to eliminate the third party and centralized trust systems. Due to recent emergence of smart contracts, there is no well-defined framework that researchers can use to evaluate smart contracts under various blockchain platforms and differentiate between them. In this work, a survey on the prominent smart contract landscape specially those based on blockchain have been conducted. Based on the survey, an evaluation framework to assess smart contracts has been proposed. The framework is a set of criteria based on two major aspects; infrastructure related and development related criteria. The evaluation framework was peer-reviewed for reliability and validity. To measure the applicability of the proposed framework, it has been used to empirically evaluate some of the most prominent smart contract platforms. The results of the empirical evaluation have shown that the Ethereum blockchain smart contract exceeds the others in terms of development tools, resources, and community support. EOS blockchain smart contracts have the best execution speeds, and transaction costs. Lastly, Stellar blockchain has predictability and the best transaction builder to use in smart contract development concerning user friendliness. Recommendations for smart contract developers are provided in light of the research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Ethereum transaction calculator. Available at https://ethgasstation.info/calculatorTxV.php.

  2. 2.

    Metamask is an application that enables the user to communicate with the Ethereum blockchain without the need to deploy a full node. Available at https://metamask.io/.

  3. 3.

    BEOSIN is an online IDE for EOS smart contract development, testing, and deployment. Available at https://beosin.com/BEOSIN-IDE/index.html#/.

  4. 4.

    Scatter is a multi-blockchain platform (EOS, Ethereum, Tron) wallet and asset management software. Available at https://get-scatter.com/.

  5. 5.

    DApp Radar. Available at https://dappradar.com/.

  6. 6.

    jungletestnet.io. Available at https://monitor.jungletestnet.io/#home.

References

  1. Szabo, N.: Smart contracts. Retrieved from http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literature/LOTwinterschool2006/szabo.best.vwh.net/smart.contracts.html (1994)

  2. Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Corbet, S., Lucey, B., Yarovaya, L.: Datestamping the bitcoin and Ethereum bubbles. Financ. Res. Letters 26, 81–88 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Clack, C.D., Bakshi, V.A., Braine, L.: Smart contract templates: foundations, design landscape and research directions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.00771 (2016)

  5. Norta, A.: Designing a smart-contract application layer for transacting decentralized autonomous organizations. In: International Conference on Advances in Computing and Data Sciences, pp. 595–604. Springer, Singapore (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wang, S., Yuan, Y., Wang, X., Li, J., Qin, R., Wang, F. Y.: An overview of smart contract: architecture, applications, and future trends. In: 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), pp. 108–113. IEEE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Yang, Q., Xu, F., Zhang, Y., Liu, F., Hu, W., Liao, Q.: Design and implementation of a loan system based on smart contract. In: International Conference on Smart Blockchain, pp. 22–31. Springer, Cham (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yang, X., Yi, X., Nepal, S., Han, F.: Decentralized voting: a self-tallying voting system using a smart contract on the Ethereum blockchain. In: International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering, pp. 18–35. Springer, Cham (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bogner, A., Chanson, M., Meeuw, A.: A decentralized sharing app running a smart contract on the Ethereum blockchain. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on the Internet of Things, pp. 177–178. ACM (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Blockgeeks.: A deeper look at different smart contract platforms. Retrieved from https://blockgeeks.com/guides/different-smart-contract-platforms/ (2018)

  11. Mulders, M.: Comparison of smart contract platforms. Retrieved from https://hackernoon.com/comparison-of-smart-contract-platforms-2796e34673b7 (2018)

  12. Max, T.: Smart contract platforms—Ethereum vs Neo, Lisk, EOS and Cardano. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/smart-contract-platforms-ethereum-vs-neo-lisk-eos-cardano-mwirabua (2018)

  13. Chiu, W.: Smart contract platform comparison (programmer explain). NEO, ETH or ADA. https://medium.com/coinmonks/smart-contract-platform-comparison-programmer-explain-bdc7c303c721 (2018)

  14. Macrinici, D., Cartofeanu, C., Gao, S.: Smart contract applications within blockchain technology: a systematic mapping study. Telematics Inform. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.10.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Delmolino, K., Arnett, M., Kosba, A., Miller, A., Shi, E.: Step by step towards creating a safe smart contract: Lessons and insights from a cryptocurrency lab. In: International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pp. 79–94. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bartoletti, M., Pompianu, L.: An empirical analysis of smart contracts: platforms, applications, and design patterns. In: International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pp. 494–509. Springer, Cham (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Heitkötter, H., Hanschke, S., Majchrzak, T.A.: Evaluating cross-platform development approaches for mobile applications. In: International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies, pp. 120–138. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cai, W., Wang, Z., Ernst, J.B., Hong, Z., Feng, C., Leung, V.C.: Decentralized applications: the blockchain-empowered software system. IEEE Access 6, 53019–53033 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Stellar.org.: Retrieved from https://www.stellar.org/ (2019)

  20. Atzei, N., Bartoletti, M., Cimoli, T.: A survey of attacks on Ethereum smart contracts (sok). In: Principles of Security and Trust, pp. 164–186. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Golafshani, N.: Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. Qual. Rep. 8(4), 597–606 (2003). Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol8/iss4/6

  22. Price, C.P., Jhangiani, R., Chiang, I.A.: Research Methods in Psychology, 2nd edn. BCcampus OpenEd, Canada (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Michael, R.S.: Measurement: reliability and validity. Y520 Strategies for Educational Inquiry. http://www.indiana.edu/…/week…/reliability_validity_2up (2004)

  24. Ropsten.etherescan.: Retrieved from https://ropsten.etherscan.io/ (2019)

  25. Stateofthedapps.: Retrieved from https://www.stateofthedapps.com/stats (2019)

  26. Chen, T., Li, Z., Zhou, H., Chen, J., Luo, X., Li, X., Zhang, X.: Towards saving money in using smart contracts. In: Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: New Ideas and Emerging Results, pp. 81–84. ACM (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Avan-Nomayo, O.: Ethereum Surpasses Bitcoin in Number of Active Addresses. Retrieved from https://ethereumworldnews.com/ethereum-surpasses-bitcoin-in-number-of-active-addresses/ (2018)

  28. Perez, D., Livshits, B.: Smart contract vulnerabilities: does anyone care? arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.06710 (2019)

  29. Marino, B., Juels, A.: Setting standards for altering and undoing smart contracts. In: International Symposium on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web, pp. 151–166. Springer, Cham (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Knecht, M., Stiller, B.: SmartDEMAP: a smart contract deployment and management platform. In: IFIP International Conference on Autonomous Infrastructure, Management and Security, pp. 159–164. Springer, Cham (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Bragagnolo, S., Rocha, H., Denker, M., Ducasse, S.: SmartInspect: solidity smart contract inspector. In 2018 International Workshop on Blockchain Oriented Software Engineering (IWBOSE), pp. 9–18. IEEE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mavridou, A., Laszka, A.: Tool demonstration: FSolidM for designing secure Ethereum smart contracts. In: International Conference on Principles of Security and Trust, pp. 270–277. Springer, Cham (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Luu, L., Chu, D.H., Olickel, H., Saxena, P., Hobor, A.: Making smart contracts smarter. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 254–269. ACM (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Porru, S., Pinna, A., Marchesi, M., Tonelli, R.: Blockchain-oriented software engineering: challenges and new directions. In: Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion, pp. 169–171. IEEE Press (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Destefanis, G., Marchesi, M., Ortu, M., Tonelli, R., Bracciali, A., Hierons, R.: Smart contracts vulnerabilities: a call for blockchain software engineering? In: 2018 International Workshop on Blockchain Oriented Software Engineering (IWBOSE), pp. 19–25. IEEE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Smart Contracts. Retrieved from https://blockchainhub.net/smart-contracts/ (2019)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Information Technology, University of Bahrain, Zallaq, Bahrain

    Imane Mokdad & Nabil M. Hewahi

Authors
  1. Imane Mokdad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nabil M. Hewahi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Computing and Information Technology, University of Bisha, Bisha, Saudi Arabia

    Mohammad Ayoub Khan

  2. College of Computing and Information Technology, University of Bisha, Bisha, Saudi Arabia

    Mohammad Tabrez Quasim

  3. College of Computing and Information Technology, University of Bisha, Bisha, Saudi Arabia

    Fahad Algarni

  4. College of Computing and Information Technology, University of Bisha, Bisha, Saudi Arabia

    Abdullah Alharthi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mokdad, I., Hewahi, N.M. (2020). Empirical Evaluation of Blockchain Smart Contracts. In: Khan, M., Quasim, M., Algarni, F., Alharthi, A. (eds) Decentralised Internet of Things. Studies in Big Data, vol 71. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38677-1_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation