IP Library Granted Patent US 12,452,033
Granted Patent B2
US 12,452,033 · App. 18/769,344 · Granted Oct 21, 2025

Blockchain for general computation

Inventors: Thomas Trevethan (London, GB); Craig Steven Wright (London, GB)
Assignee: NCHAIN LICENSING AG
H04L9/0637H04L9/085H04L9/3218H04L9/3236H04L9/3271H04L9/3297H04L9/50
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,452,033
App. No.
18/769,344
Granted
Oct 21, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Techniques are presented for a computer-implemented method that may be implemented using a blockchain network. The computer-implemented method includes: monitoring a system to detect a challenge to a proposer string in response to a request, and as a result of detecting the challenge: placing a first digital asset and a second digital asset under exclusive control of a group of nodes via a public key associated with a group of nodes, wherein the first and second digital assets are configured to be released when a threshold number of members of the group of nodes generate a valid signature for the public key associated with the group of nodes; resolving the challenge using a blockchain network; and distributing, by the group of nodes, digital assets from the first digital asset and the second digital asset to one or more parties of the system based at least in part on the solution.

Claims (48)

1. A computer-implemented method comprising:

monitoring a computational task distribution system to detect a challenge to a proposer string provided by a proposer computer system in response to a request made by a requester computer system, the request specifying a computational task and a first digital asset associated with the request, the proposer string indicated by a hash of a solution to the computational task, the proposer string specifying a second digital asset referenced in an input to a proposer transaction associated with the proposer string;

in response to receiving the solution to the computational task, the requester computer system constructing a requester transaction including the first digital asset and the second digital asset;

locking the requester transaction for a challenge period and allowing unlocking the requester transaction by the proposer computer system if no challenge is issued after expiry of the challenge period to allow the proposer computer system to claim the first digital asset and the second digital asset from the requester transaction; and

in response to detecting the challenge, performing at least:

placing the first digital asset and the second digital asset under exclusive control of a group of nodes via a public key associated with the group of nodes, wherein the first and the second digital assets are configured to be released when a threshold number of members of the group of nodes generate a valid signature for the public key associated with the group of nodes;

resolving the challenge using a first blockchain network by at least selecting a solution from a set of solutions provided to the first blockchain network, the set of solutions at least including the proposer string; and

distributing, by the group of nodes, digital assets from the first digital asset and the second digital asset to one or more parties of the computational task distribution system based at least in part on the solution.

2. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the proposer string is selected from the set of solutions based, at least in part, on a timestamp associated with the proposer string.

3. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the challenge specifies a hash of a challenger string to the computational task and the set of solutions includes the challenger string.

4. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the computational task distribution system is implemented as a webservice associated with a proof-of-work blockchain network.

5. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the computational task distribution system is implemented on a proof-of-work blockchain network.

6. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the first blockchain network is a proof-of-stake blockchain network.

7. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the proposer string indicates that there is no solution to the computational task.

8. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the challenge indicates that there is no solution to the computational task.

9. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the digital assets include a deposit provided by the proposer to the first blockchain network.

10. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein the digital assets are distributed from the first digital asset, the second digital asset, and a third digital asset referenced in an input to a transaction associated with the challenge.

11. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein resolving the challenge includes performing a corresponding set of verification operations of one or more solutions of the set of solutions.

12. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein resolving the challenge includes performing an arbitration procedure that at least includes:

receiving, from the proposer, a first set of intermediate results for the proposer string of the set of solutions;

receiving, from a challenger, a second set of intermediate results for a challenger string of the set of solutions;

comparing the first set of intermediate results to the second set of intermediate results to determine a location where the proposer string and the challenger string diverge; and

selecting a solution based, at least in part, on:

repeating one or more calculations of the first set of intermediate results at the location using the first blockchain; and

repeating one or more calculations of the second set of intermediate results at the location using the first blockchain.

13. The computer-implemented method claimed in claim 1 , wherein resolving the challenge at least includes identifying an incorrect solution of the set of solutions by at least:

receiving, from the proposer, a first set of intermediate results for the proposer string of the set of solutions;

receiving, from a challenger, a second set of intermediate results for a challenger string of the set of solutions;

analyzing the first set of intermediate results and the second set of intermediate results to identify a location where the proposer string and the challenger string diverge; and

identifying the incorrect solution based, at least in part, on the analyzing.

14. A system, comprising:

a processor; and

memory including executable instructions that, as a result of execution by the processor, causes the system to

monitor a computational task distribution system to detect a challenge to a proposer string provided by a proposer computer system in response to a request made by a requester computer system, the request specifying a computational task and a first digital asset associated with the request, the proposer string indicated by a hash of a solution to the computational task, the proposer string specifying a second digital asset referenced in an input to a proposer transaction associated with the proposer string;

in response to receipt of the solution to the computational task, the requester computer system is configured to construct a requester transaction including the first digital asset and the second digital asset;

lock the requester transaction for a challenge period and allow unlocking the requester transaction by the proposer computer system if no challenge is issued after expiry of the challenge period to allow the proposer computer system to claim the first digital asset and the second digital asset from the requester transaction; and

as a result of the detection of the challenge, at least:

place the first digital asset and the second digital asset under exclusive control of a group of nodes via a public key associated with the group of nodes, wherein the first and the second digital assets are configured to be released when a threshold number of members of the group of nodes generate a valid signature for the public key associated with the group of nodes;

resolve the challenge using a first blockchain network by at least selecting a solution from a set of solutions provided to the first blockchain network, the set of solutions at least including the proposer string; and

distribute, by the group of nodes, digital assets from the first digital asset and the second digital asset to one or more parties of the computational task distribution system based at least in part on the solution.

15. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon executable instructions that, as a result of being executed by a processor of a computer system, cause the computer system to at least:

monitor a computational task distribution system to detect a challenge to a proposer string provided by a proposer computer system in response to a request made by a requester computer system, the request specifying a computational task and a first digital asset associated with the request, the proposer string indicated by a hash of a solution to the computational task, the proposer string specifying a second digital asset referenced in an input to a proposer transaction associated with the proposer string;

in response to receipt of the solution to the computational task, the requester computer system is configured to construct a requester transaction including the first digital asset and the second digital asset;

lock the requester transaction for a challenge period and allow unlocking the requester transaction by the proposer computer system if no challenge is issued after expiry of the challenge period to allow the proposer computer system to claim the first digital asset and the second digital asset from the requester transaction; and

as a result of the detection of the challenge, at least:

place the first digital asset and the second digital asset under exclusive control of a group of nodes via a public key associated with the group of nodes, wherein the first and the second digital assets are configured to be released when a threshold number of members of the group of nodes generate a valid signature for the public key associated with the group of nodes;

resolve the challenge using a first blockchain network by at least selecting a solution from a set of solutions provided to the first blockchain network, the set of solutions at least including the proposer string; and

distribute, by the group of nodes, digital assets from the first digital asset and the second digital asset to one or more parties of the computational task distribution system based at least in part on the solution.

Assignments (3)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jul 10, 2024
From: TREVETHAN, THOMAS
To: NCHAIN HOLDINGS LTD.
Reel/Frame 067955/0730 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jul 10, 2024
From: WRIGHT, CRAIG STEVEN
To: NCHAIN HOLDINGS LTD.
Reel/Frame 067955/0750 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Jul 10, 2024
From: NCHAIN HOLDINGS LTD.
To: NCHAIN LICENSING AG
Reel/Frame 068274/0969 →
Priority Claims (1)
GB 1709188 · Jun 9, 2017 · national
Continuity (3)
Continuation 17991777 · Nov 21, 2022
Continuation 16620865
Related Publication 20240364498A1 · Oct 31, 2024
References Cited (35)
US 9442941B1 · Luz · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 11188977B2 · Youb · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 11509455B2 · Trevethan et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11941588B2 · Goeringer · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 11946870B2 · McManus · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20090327141A1 · Rabin · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20100145951A1 · Van Coeverden De Groot · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 20160330034A1 · Back et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160342977A1 · Lam · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20170046638A1 · Chan et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170163733A1 · Grefen et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170295180A1 · Day · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180109541A1 · Gleichauf · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180246717A1 · Martin · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190340379A1 · Beecham · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200162264A1 · Zamani · 2020 [cited by examiner]
Antonopoulos, “Mastering Bitcoin—Unlocking Digital Cryptocurrencies,” O'Reilly Media, Inc., Dec. 20, 2014, 282 pages. [cited by applicant]
Bartoletti et al., “A Proof-of-Stake Protocol for Consensus on Bitcoin Subchains,” Universita degli Studi di Cagliari, italy, 2017, 16 pages. [cited by applicant]
De La Rouviere, “An Intro to TrueBit: A Scalable Decentralized Computational Court,” https://medium.com/@simondlr/an-intro-to-truebit-a-scalable-decentral, Jul. 5, 2016, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
Ethereum Foundation, “TrueBit: Scalable Computation—Christian Reitwiessner,” YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO2tEOBBFOE, Mar. 29, 2017 [retrieved Apr. 12, 2022], 13 pages. [cited by applicant]
Gerbus et al., “FAQ Golemfactory/Golem Wiki,” https://github.com/golemfactory/golem/wiki/FAQ [retreieved Aug. 31, 2017], 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Aug. 6, 2018, Patent Application No. PCT/IB2018/053979, 12 pages. [cited by applicant]
Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System,” Bitcoin, Oct. 31, 2008, https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
Pipermerriam, “Ethereum-Computation-Market,” https://github.com/pipermerriam/ethereum-computationmarket/blob/master/docs/overview.rst [retrieved Aug. 31, 2017], 2 pages. [cited by applicant]
Poon et al., “Plasma: Scalable Autonomous Smart Contracts,” retrieved from https://plasma.io/plasma.pdf, Aug. 11, 2017, 47 pages. [cited by applicant]
Satoshi et al., “Connection Limits,” Bitcoin Forum, Aug. 9, 2010, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=741.0;prev_next=prev, 2 pages. [cited by applicant]
Teutsch et al., “A scalable verification solution for blockchains,” Nov. 16, 2017, https://people.cs.uchicago.edu/˜teutsch/papers/truebit.pdf, 50 pages. [cited by applicant]
UK Commercial Search Report mailed Sep. 4, 2017, Patent Application No. GB1709188.5, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
UK IPO Search Report mailed Nov. 10, 2017, Patent Application No. GB1709188.5, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Wood et al., “Polkadot: Vision for A Heterogeneous Multi-Chain Framework,” retrieved from https://github.com/polkadot-io/polkadotpaper, Sep. 10, 2016, 21 pages. [cited by applicant]
Zawistowski et al., “Golem,” The Golem Project Crowdfunding Whitepaper, Nov. 2016, 28 pages. [cited by applicant]
Zyskind et al., “Enigma: Decentralized Computation Platform with Guaranteed Privacy,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1506, Jun. 10, 2015, 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
The Community, Revision 04, Elastic Project: “The Decentralized Supercomputer”, Mar. 11, 2016, Whitepaper, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Jain et al., “How to Verify Computation with a Rational Network”, Online Jun. 19, 2016, 15 pages. [cited by applicant]
Japan Patent Office, “Decision to Grant a Patent” in Application No. 2019-566123, Sep. 30, 2022, 2 pages. [cited by applicant]
Cited By (1)
US 12,699,812