The transition from centralized power systems to decentralized infrastructures with a high share of renewable energy sources calls for reliable settlement in P2P electricity trading across “smart” regions. Blockchain platforms can enhance transparency and facilitate automated settlement; however, double-spend attacks still pose a threat to transaction finality and, consequently, undermine trust in the payment layer. This paper quantifies this risk through a probabilistic analysis of classical double-spend scenarios for Proof-of-Work (PoW) and Proof-of-Stake (PoS) blockchains augmented with periodic checkpoints, which render the chain history prior to the latest checkpoint effectively irreversible. We develop attack models for both consensus mechanisms and derive explicit formulas for the attacker’s success probability as a function of the adversarial share, the spacing between checkpoints, and the number of confirmation blocks. On this basis, we compute the minimum confirmation depth needed to satisfy a predefined risk threshold. Numerical evaluation using the derived expressions shows that checkpoints consistently reduce double-spend probability relative to checkpoint-free baselines; in the evaluated settings, the reduction reaches up to 44% and becomes more pronounced as the adversarial share increases. Finally, the analysis yields practical guidance for energy trading applications: accept a payment after the computed number of confirmations when it fits within a single checkpoint interval; otherwise, treat finality as reaching the next checkpoint.
Kovalchuk et al. (Fri,) studied this question.