Pages:
Author

Topic: BTC empty blocks (2009 - 5 May 2020): miners, size, daily, monthly,yearly stats - page 2. (Read 1136 times)

legendary
Activity: 2310
Merit: 4085
Farewell o_e_l_e_o
I will look deeper at your replies above but from what I get, there is no guarantee that one block after or before an empty block are lined by the same miner. So, I could be wrong, but I guess the Phil.'s request will be satisfied if I do an analysis for stratified fees by different groups of timegaps (in seconds) of 2 consecutive blocks found by the same pool, AntPool, ie. We don't have to rely on empty blocks, I meant.

I can do it for 1-year data of AntPool, from blockchair.com with above assumption (in seconds of timestamps). After having raw results with assumption, we might move further with correct timestamps in seconds. Let's me know if it meets your request. If it goes well, I can expand observed period to 2014 (6 years in total).

But for given data from blockchair.com, I have to assume figures for seconds are always 00, that somewhat biases results.
legendary
Activity: 2464
Merit: 6687
be constructive or S.T.F.U
but   the four groups above  for bitmain  should have  for arguments sake

1-15 =   30%
16-30 = 25%
31-45 = 25%
46-60 =20%

I have no idea what the % will be or should be I put those up for a simple reason

they should be roughly the same if you use the

 unknown or f2pool or btc.com or  bw.com

the time ratios for all bigger pools should not be far apart.

I understand exactly what you are trying to conclude, I can do that analysis if someone provides the data tranthidung or LoyceV will probably do it, i just hope tranthidung would provide me with a proper format I can use, I tried copying his format to excel and it doesn't come out as proper tables, in fact, if he understands what you want, he can do the analysis himself.

All he needs is filter Blocks that have 1 transaction (n) and every n-1 block,  he will end up with 20186 blocks, half are empty blocks and the other half are the once that preceded them, he then can do;

Time difference = Timestamp of n - timestamp of n-1 , that will get him 10093 results, he then can take the average time difference for both Antpool and BTC.com and compare them against other large pools that are independent of Bitmain such as Slushpool and F2pool, Viabtc should be excluded since Bitmain is the largest shareholder of it.
legendary
Activity: 4354
Merit: 9201
'The right to privacy matters'
so the ant pool stats page looks like. 1 sec block
the btc.com. shows. 6 seconds
inconsistent .

I think block timestamp variance is normal, some explore to use the "mined at" timestamp, they extract that from the block itself, others use the "received" time which is the time that their node became aware of that block, and it takes time to propagate the block, so it's there is no problem with that.

The strange thing, however, with block 628,427 is that Antpool reported 2020-05-01 15:15:53 while explorers  (including those oweded by Bitmain) reported 2020-05-01 18:15:47, one would think that the pool's time should be less since the pool first finds a block and  THEN sends it out, I think the status on the pool pages are not accurate.

You should keep in mind that the time displaying on every other explorer is under the control of antpool anyway, since they are the once who put it, they also own btc.com so they could change the status there too, I think this is only a bad input on the pool side, they might very well be counting on the miner's time and just so happened that miner's clock was off by a few seconds, since we don't know how does the pool itself gets it's timestamps, we can't conclude anything.







but of their 2 blocks I checked

 628428/628427   was  1 or 6 seconds apart


624652/651         was  31 or 34 seconds apart.

I am looking to do 2 things establish that  1,2,3,4,5,6 second variance in reporting is random and neutral or favors ant-pool


and see frequency of

1-15   second empties
16-30 second empties
31-45 second empties
46-60 second empties.

antpool is the biggest pool it should have the most empties = fact  simply because it is more likely they anyone to do a 1 second block.


but   the four groups above  for bitmain  should have  for arguments sake

1-15 =   30%
16-30 = 25%
31-45 = 25%
46-60 =20%

I have no idea what the % will be or should be I put those up for a simple reason

they should be roughly the same if you use the

 unknown or f2pool or btc.com or  bw.com

the time ratios for all bigger pools should not be far apart.

if  antpool has a really different grouping it indicates intent

ie
antpool

40
30
20
10

all other pools

25
25
25
25

 would be interesting to know they simply match the others and are bigger then the others or  they do something to alter  the ratios.  of time.

I am pretty sure they did not doctor all time stamps on the other pools  if they doctored theirs this would show a big difference.

If they match more or less they could just be bigger.

the four category time ratio  for empties could be helpful .

put another way  they have 17% of the empties and roughly 15-18% of the network

but do their empty block time patterns match that of the other big pools empty block time patterns.
legendary
Activity: 2464
Merit: 6687
be constructive or S.T.F.U
so the ant pool stats page looks like. 1 sec block
the btc.com. shows. 6 seconds
inconsistent .

I think block timestamp variance is normal, some explore to use the "mined at" timestamp, they extract that from the block itself, others use the "received" time which is the time that their node became aware of that block, and it takes time to propagate the block, so it's there is no problem with that.

The strange thing, however, with block 628,427 is that Antpool reported 2020-05-01 15:15:53 while explorers  (including those oweded by Bitmain) reported 2020-05-01 18:15:47, one would think that the pool's time should be less since the pool first finds a block and  THEN sends it out, I think the status on the pool pages are not accurate.

You should keep in mind that the time displaying on every other explorer is under the control of antpool anyway, since they are the once who put it, they also own btc.com so they could change the status there too, I think this is only a bad input on the pool side, they might very well be counting on the miner's time and just so happened that miner's clock was off by a few seconds, since we don't know how does the pool itself gets it's timestamps, we can't conclude anything.





legendary
Activity: 4354
Merit: 9201
'The right to privacy matters'
I think I can do something for you but I don't really get your ideas. I need a little more explanation. If I understand your request well, I think I have to get all blocks found by AntPool, includes empty ones, to have relevant data for analysis. That is not what I have now.

I know what phill wants, he wants the time between every empty block and the block the came right before it, in other words, if you have a total of 10093 blocks you will need to scrape 10093*2 blocks.

An example:

The latest empty block by Antpool is block 628428 , you will need the timestamp of that block and the timestamp of that block-1 which is block 628427.

The problem with using blockchair is that the timestamp excludes the two digits that represent seconds, this means the time difference between those two blocks will be identical either 0 or 1 minute.

What phill wants is to see if Antpool/BTC.com aka bitmian was trying to obstruct transactions by not including transactions on purpose, for that to be proven, the time between those two blocks needs to somewhat "long", anything above average probably means the empty block was mined empty on purpose IF that happens quite often.

Another problem is, you are counting on Bitmain's stupidity leaving you such a trace, I haven't done any analysis in that regards but I am sure even if bitmain took 2 minutes to find the block, they could still alter the time in the block header and submit it as if it was a 1-second block, but by all means, please go ahead and do analysis.



They could be arrogant enough to not hide it.  I was looking at. their stats page and found. their last empty block was reported to be 1 second but it was reported to be 6 or 7 seconds on the explorer.


 Just today there was a fee free block.

Let me pull it up.

628428 came in 1 second after 628427 according to stats page

they ripped off 3 in a row

628426  fees were 1.0282xxx

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/block/0000000000000000000254d12f670a0e5f3bdf579ce961f23295b0f7f1a6a783

628427  fees were 0.9683
https://www.blockchain.com/btc/block/00000000000000000007a4504c9d9aa57510a66ae0c995da60cfbf7cee451d84

628428 fees were zero 0.0

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/block/00000000000000000008c8fa0d79f31b44e6df494d20da165bf0f0b291e13d9a


blockchain is missing the seconds

here is bitmain's stats page

https://www.antpool.com/poolStats.htm





bitmain had a 1 second block as per their stat page

 a normal block should be 600 seconds  odds for the network would be high  for any given block to be a 1 second block

you bring up an interesting point in saying we get 1 empty block a day.

that would be 1 in 144.

628603 came at 14:22:59
https://btc.com/000000000000000000015c0f2df9276237da03c568231b4f67d367ebdee91cd5


628602 came at 14:22:48

https://btc.com/00000000000000000003cdbcc1ed3d99bfb8c6db73a8db671a42a62624c30f7c


this is 11 seconds with zero fees

but ant pool block
628,428  came at 11:15:53

https://btc.com/00000000000000000008c8fa0d79f31b44e6df494d20da165bf0f0b291e13d9a

and block 628,427 came at 11:15:47

https://btc.com/00000000000000000007a4504c9d9aa57510a66ae0c995da60cfbf7cee451d84

this is 6 seconds or about 6/11 time to earn as the other example.


although on their stats page they claim it took 1 second.

I would love to know  the time gaps for every one  and how many per day.

____________________________________________________________________-
...



so the ant pool stats page looks like. 1 sec block
the btc.com. shows. 6 seconds

inconsistent .

what about their other empty blocks

find a pattern in this and see if it is a cover up or if they simply make empty blocks due to large hash rate.

the one below says 1 second yet if you search btc.com it says 6 seconds did they lie to cover up or is it a glitch

https://www.antpool.com/poolStats.htm?tp=2






this one you need to look at btc.com to get prior block time
you won't know how honest antpool is since they did not have back to back blocks but you still can see how long they claim it took them to get this block



this empty is way more shady  antpool say 34 second gap if you look at time stamps
btc.com says 31 seconds apart both 31 or 34 seconds  are really long time for zero transactions.


legendary
Activity: 2464
Merit: 6687
be constructive or S.T.F.U
I think I can do something for you but I don't really get your ideas. I need a little more explanation. If I understand your request well, I think I have to get all blocks found by AntPool, includes empty ones, to have relevant data for analysis. That is not what I have now.

I know what phill wants, he wants the time between every empty block and the block the came right before it, in other words, if you have a total of 10093 blocks you will need to scrape 10093*2 blocks.

An example:

The latest empty block by Antpool is block 628428 , you will need the timestamp of that block and the timestamp of that block-1 which is block 628427.

The problem with using blockchair is that the timestamp excludes the two digits that represent seconds, this means the time difference between those two blocks will be identical either 0 or 1 minute.

What phill wants is to see if Antpool/BTC.com aka bitmian was trying to obstruct transactions by not including transactions on purpose, for that to be proven, the time between those two blocks needs to somewhat "long", anything above average probably means the empty block was mined empty on purpose IF that happens quite often.

Another problem is, you are counting on Bitmain's stupidity leaving you such a trace, I haven't done any analysis in that regards but I am sure even if bitmain took 2 minutes to find the block, they could still alter the time in the block header and submit it as if it was a 1-second block, but by all means, please go ahead and do analysis.

legendary
Activity: 2310
Merit: 4085
Farewell o_e_l_e_o
I think I can do something for you but I don't really get your ideas. I need a little more explanation. If I understand your request well, I think I have to get all blocks found by AntPool, includes empty ones, to have relevant data for analysis. That is not what I have now.

Reminder: I only have data on empty blocks, not all blocks.

Here is 30 first empty blocks and last 30 empty blocks of AntPool within the observed period.
Code:
    +------------------------------------------------+
     | height            minedon   sizekb        date |
     |------------------------------------------------|
  1. | 295637   2014-04-13 15:52     .201   13apr2014 |
  2. | 318180   2014-08-30 02:29      .25   30aug2014 |
  3. | 318202   2014-08-30 06:16      .25   30aug2014 |
  4. | 319252   2014-09-05 17:06      .25   05sep2014 |
  5. | 319412   2014-09-06 16:57      .25   06sep2014 |
     |------------------------------------------------|
  6. | 319591   2014-09-07 19:11      .25   07sep2014 |
  7. | 320010   2014-09-10 15:05      .25   10sep2014 |
  8. | 320724   2014-09-14 22:54      .25   14sep2014 |
  9. | 320857   2014-09-15 19:31      .25   15sep2014 |
 10. | 321174   2014-09-17 14:46      .25   17sep2014 |
     |------------------------------------------------|
 11. | 321739   2014-09-20 20:42      .25   20sep2014 |
 12. | 321788   2014-09-21 02:34      .25   21sep2014 |
 13. | 322407   2014-09-24 23:58      .25   24sep2014 |
 14. | 322420   2014-09-25 01:14      .25   25sep2014 |
 15. | 322919   2014-09-28 12:04      .25   28sep2014 |
     |------------------------------------------------|
 16. | 323667   2014-10-03 17:32      .25   03oct2014 |
 17. | 323713   2014-10-04 01:09      .25   04oct2014 |
 18. | 324519   2014-10-09 10:56      .25   09oct2014 |
 19. | 324619   2014-10-10 00:02      .25   10oct2014 |
 20. | 324847   2014-10-11 12:27      .25   11oct2014 |
     |------------------------------------------------|
 21. | 325496   2014-10-15 23:07      .25   15oct2014 |
 22. | 325839   2014-10-18 05:38      .25   18oct2014 |
 23. | 325994   2014-10-19 05:53      .25   19oct2014 |
 24. | 326053   2014-10-19 17:25      .25   19oct2014 |
 25. | 327574   2014-10-29 23:14     .248   29oct2014 |
     |------------------------------------------------|
 26. | 328525   2014-11-04 15:11     .248   04nov2014 |
 27. | 330046   2014-11-14 23:16     .248   14nov2014 |
 28. | 330108   2014-11-15 09:39     .248   15nov2014 |
 29. | 332277   2014-11-30 11:22     .248   30nov2014 |
 30. | 332553   2014-12-02 08:53     .206   02dec2014 |
     +------------------------------------------------+
..............................................................
      +------------------------------------------------+
      | height            minedon   sizekb        date |
      |------------------------------------------------|
1682. | 594573   2019-09-12 20:25     .379   12sep2019 |
1683. | 594584   2019-09-12 22:26      .38   12sep2019 |
1684. | 595057   2019-09-16 00:59     .379   16sep2019 |
1685. | 595265   2019-09-17 08:45     .378   17sep2019 |
1686. | 595366   2019-09-18 01:16     .379   18sep2019 |
      |------------------------------------------------|
1687. | 595920   2019-09-21 13:00     .379   21sep2019 |
1688. | 596059   2019-09-22 09:37     .379   22sep2019 |
1689. | 596245   2019-09-23 17:58     .379   23sep2019 |
1690. | 596270   2019-09-23 23:21     .379   23sep2019 |
1691. | 596525   2019-09-25 14:34     .379   25sep2019 |
      |------------------------------------------------|
1692. | 596588   2019-09-25 23:25     .378   25sep2019 |
1693. | 597126   2019-09-29 13:58     .379   29sep2019 |
1694. | 597980   2019-10-05 10:27      .38   05oct2019 |
1695. | 598289   2019-10-07 11:58      .38   07oct2019 |
1696. | 598356   2019-10-07 23:11      .38   07oct2019 |
      |------------------------------------------------|
1697. | 598411   2019-10-08 06:20      .38   08oct2019 |
1698. | 599327   2019-10-14 11:52     .378   14oct2019 |
1699. | 600871   2019-10-24 15:37     .378   24oct2019 |
1700. | 602493   2019-11-05 19:33      .38   05nov2019 |
1701. | 604106   2019-11-16 21:34      .38   16nov2019 |
      |------------------------------------------------|
1702. | 604202   2019-11-17 13:05      .38   17nov2019 |
1703. | 604285   2019-11-18 01:36     .379   18nov2019 |
1704. | 605320   2019-11-25 06:17      .38   25nov2019 |
1705. | 607190   2019-12-08 07:32      .38   08dec2019 |
1706. | 614346   2020-01-24 15:59      .38   24jan2020 |
      |------------------------------------------------|
1707. | 618512   2020-02-22 13:31      .38   22feb2020 |
1708. | 618861   2020-02-25 00:52      .38   25feb2020 |
1709. | 620233   2020-03-05 00:33      .38   05mar2020 |
1710. | 623149   2020-03-27 08:45      .38   27mar2020 |
1711. | 624652   2020-04-06 09:15     .379   06apr2020 |
      |------------------------------------------------|
1712. | 628428   2020-05-01 15:15     .379   01may2020 |
      +------------------------------------------------+

Edit.
I have data of all blocks found by AntPool during last one year, and I will play with them tomorrow. Stay tuned.
legendary
Activity: 4354
Merit: 9201
'The right to privacy matters'

Can you break down the times of the antpool empties

even if it is basic time in sections

blocks 1-15   seconds
blocks 16-30 seconds
blocks 31-45 seconds
blocks 46-60 sections
blocks over 60 seconds

they have 1712 empties

one reason is they are a huge pool so they will make really fast blocks

1 second to 15 second blocks  will have really low fees.


blocks over 60 seconds  should not be empty.

I am interested in how many empty blocks of the 1712 are over 15 seconds vs under 15 seconds.

legendary
Activity: 2310
Merit: 4085
Farewell o_e_l_e_o
Reminder
After the abstract section, please see my updates since the following post

ABSTRACT updated on 5May2020
  • Period: 3Jan2009 - 5may2020
  • 88894 empty blocks in the history of Bitcoin network
  • The first 2 years (2009 - 2010) account for 88.6% of total empty blocks so far. See yearly stats
  • 84218 (94.7%) of empty blocks were found by 'Unknown' miners.
  • After excluding 'Unknown' miners, AntPool and F2Pool are the two biggest ones which found 36.6% and 21.3% of the rest of empty blocks.
  • About percent of empty blocks which come after <1 minute compare to timestamp of one-block-before blocks: AntPool (72.2%) and F2Pool (71.4%). See details
  • First empty blocks of 2 biggest pool: AntPool (13 Apr 2014), F2Pool (27 May 2013)




This below section is for old version of OP.
The idea comes from mikeywith and his analysis Bitcoin's Empty Blocks Analaysis.

I simply published the thread and will write a summary for it later.

Data source

Data mining link
Results
Observed period:
  • 2011-01-01 00:05 (height #100410) to 2020-05-01 15:15 (height #628428)

Yearly distributions
Code:
    +---------------------------------------+
     | year   emptyblock_t   tempty   pempty |
     |---------------------------------------|
  1. | 2011           3585    10093     35.5 |
  2. | 2015           1701    10093     16.9 |
  3. | 2012           1526    10093     15.1 |
  4. | 2016            977    10093      9.7 |
  5. | 2014            547    10093      5.4 |
     |---------------------------------------|
  6. | 2017            528    10093      5.2 |
  7. | 2018            438    10093      4.3 |
  8. | 2013            420    10093      4.2 |
  9. | 2019            314    10093      3.1 |
 10. | 2020             57    10093       .6 |
     +---------------------------------------+

In frequency and percentage


Monthly distributions
Code:
    +------------------------+
     |   month   emptyblock_t |
     |------------------------|
  1. |  2011m1           1137 |
  2. |  2011m2            831 |
  3. |  2011m3            325 |
  4. |  2011m4            291 |
  5. |  2011m5            302 |
     |------------------------|
  6. |  2011m6            103 |
  7. |  2011m7             91 |
  8. |  2011m8             83 |
  9. |  2011m9             93 |
 10. | 2011m10             77 |
     |------------------------|
 11. | 2011m11            115 |
 12. | 2011m12            137 |
 13. |  2012m1            146 |
 14. |  2012m2            107 |
 15. |  2012m3            600 |
     |------------------------|
 16. |  2012m4            117 |
 17. |  2012m5             82 |
 18. |  2012m6             73 |
 19. |  2012m7             85 |
 20. |  2012m8             83 |
     |------------------------|
 21. |  2012m9             45 |
 22. | 2012m10             75 |
 23. | 2012m11             71 |
 24. | 2012m12             42 |
 25. |  2013m1             39 |
     |------------------------|
 26. |  2013m2             44 |
 27. |  2013m3             45 |
 28. |  2013m4             27 |
 29. |  2013m5             50 |
 30. |  2013m6             21 |
     |------------------------|
 31. |  2013m7             32 |
 32. |  2013m8             37 |
 33. |  2013m9             15 |
 34. | 2013m10             32 |
 35. | 2013m11             37 |
     |------------------------|
 36. | 2013m12             41 |
 37. |  2014m1             42 |
 38. |  2014m2             42 |
 39. |  2014m3             39 |
 40. |  2014m4             51 |
     |------------------------|
 41. |  2014m5             42 |
 42. |  2014m6             35 |
 43. |  2014m7             42 |
 44. |  2014m8             54 |
 45. |  2014m9             51 |
     |------------------------|
 46. | 2014m10             51 |
 47. | 2014m11             36 |
 48. | 2014m12             62 |
 49. |  2015m1             65 |
 50. |  2015m2             60 |
     |------------------------|
 51. |  2015m3             75 |
 52. |  2015m4             61 |
 53. |  2015m5            127 |
 54. |  2015m6            119 |
 55. |  2015m7            218 |
     |------------------------|
 56. |  2015m8            187 |
 57. |  2015m9            187 |
 58. | 2015m10            177 |
 59. | 2015m11            232 |
 60. | 2015m12            193 |
     |------------------------|
 61. |  2016m1            189 |
 62. |  2016m2            192 |
 63. |  2016m3            170 |
 64. |  2016m4            108 |
 65. |  2016m5             48 |
     |------------------------|
 66. |  2016m6             40 |
 67. |  2016m7             31 |
 68. |  2016m8             52 |
 69. |  2016m9             43 |
 70. | 2016m10             35 |
     |------------------------|
 71. | 2016m11             35 |
 72. | 2016m12             34 |
 73. |  2017m1             46 |
 74. |  2017m2             54 |
 75. |  2017m3             47 |
     |------------------------|
 76. |  2017m4             57 |
 77. |  2017m5             75 |
 78. |  2017m6             37 |
 79. |  2017m7             42 |
 80. |  2017m8             36 |
     |------------------------|
 81. |  2017m9             26 |
 82. | 2017m10             33 |
 83. | 2017m11             35 |
 84. | 2017m12             40 |
 85. |  2018m1             44 |
     |------------------------|
 86. |  2018m2             34 |
 87. |  2018m3             23 |
 88. |  2018m4             28 |
 89. |  2018m5             28 |
 90. |  2018m6             29 |
     |------------------------|
 91. |  2018m7             40 |
 92. |  2018m8             39 |
 93. |  2018m9             74 |
 94. | 2018m10             51 |
 95. | 2018m11             25 |
     |------------------------|
 96. | 2018m12             23 |
 97. |  2019m1             47 |
 98. |  2019m2             42 |
 99. |  2019m3             32 |
100. |  2019m4             19 |
     |------------------------|
101. |  2019m5             36 |
102. |  2019m6             18 |
103. |  2019m7             22 |
104. |  2019m8             21 |
105. |  2019m9             26 |
     |------------------------|
106. | 2019m10             17 |
107. | 2019m11             15 |
108. | 2019m12             19 |
109. |  2020m1             14 |
110. |  2020m2             14 |
     |------------------------|
111. |  2020m3             14 |
112. |  2020m4             14 |
113. |  2020m5              1 |
     +------------------------+
Code:
   variable |         N      mean        sd       p50       p25       p75       min       max
-------------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
emptyblock_t |     113.0      89.3     146.1      44.0      34.0      83.0       1.0    1137.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Daily distributions
Stats for daily here is a little bit biased and I need to correct them later. Because for now, stats are for non-zero dates. Only days have empty blocks are included in the dataset. I will do some more steps to includes days with zero-empty block and update stats for this part later.
Code:
Summary for variables: emptyblock_t
     by categories of: year

     year |         N      mean        sd       p50       p25       p75       min       max
----------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     2011 |     351.0      10.2      13.5       5.0       3.0      11.0       1.0      80.0
     2012 |     333.0       4.6       5.7       3.0       2.0       4.0       1.0      31.0
     2013 |     237.0       1.8       1.0       2.0       1.0       2.0       1.0       6.0
     2014 |     282.0       1.9       1.1       2.0       1.0       3.0       1.0       6.0
     2015 |     348.0       4.9       3.0       4.0       2.5       7.0       1.0      19.0
     2016 |     291.0       3.4       2.7       2.0       1.0       5.0       1.0      14.0
     2017 |     271.0       1.9       1.0       2.0       1.0       3.0       1.0       6.0
     2018 |     242.0       1.8       1.3       1.0       1.0       2.0       1.0       9.0
     2019 |     192.0       1.6       1.0       1.0       1.0       2.0       1.0       7.0
     2020 |      45.0       1.3       0.5       1.0       1.0       1.0       1.0       3.0
----------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total |    2592.0       3.9       6.3       2.0       1.0       4.0       1.0      80.0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Size
There are some outliers in size, I don't know reasons behind.
Code:
Summary for variables: sizekb
     by categories of: year

    year |         N      mean        sd       p50       p25       p75       min       max
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    2011 |  3585.000     0.232     0.152     0.215     0.215     0.216     0.210     3.007
    2012 |  1526.000     0.268     0.532     0.217     0.216     0.223     0.188     7.494
    2013 |   420.000     0.543     1.683     0.241     0.223     0.248     0.176    16.829
    2014 |   547.000     0.576     2.099     0.250     0.241     0.255     0.183    17.748
    2015 |  1701.000     0.268     0.620     0.209     0.208     0.252     0.183    10.642
    2016 |   977.000     0.316     0.628     0.210     0.208     0.229     0.189     7.437
    2017 |   528.000     0.264     0.194     0.259     0.238     0.266     0.191     4.422
    2018 |   438.000     0.279     0.028     0.285     0.258     0.288     0.209     0.349
    2019 |   314.000     0.310     0.051     0.288     0.278     0.366     0.196     0.384
    2020 |    57.000     0.336     0.040     0.340     0.296     0.366     0.244     0.380
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Total | 10093.000     0.290     0.721     0.216     0.215     0.241     0.176    17.748
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Miners
Miners found less than 8 empty blocks are all classified as <= 8 blocks found. If we exclude 'Unknown', the AntPool is the biggest one.
Code:
    +----------------------------------------------------+
     |             miner   emptyblock_t   tempty   pempty |
     |----------------------------------------------------|
  1. |           Unknown           5386    10093     53.4 |
  2. |           AntPool           1712    10093       17 |
  3. |            F2Pool            998    10093      9.9 |
  4. |           BTC.com            365    10093      3.6 |
  5. |            BW.COM            319    10093      3.2 |
     |----------------------------------------------------|
  6. |           Eligius            296    10093      2.9 |
  7. |          KnCMiner            220    10093      2.2 |
  8. |         SlushPool            199    10093        2 |
  9. |         BitMinter            131    10093      1.3 |
 10. |         BTCC Pool            101    10093        1 |
     |----------------------------------------------------|
 11. |           BTC.TOP             82    10093       .8 |
 12. |             Bixin             71    10093       .7 |
 13. | <= 8 blocks found             56    10093       .6 |
 14. |            ViaBTC             50    10093       .5 |
 15. |         EclipseMC             44    10093       .4 |
     |----------------------------------------------------|
 16. |            58COIN             27    10093       .3 |
 17. |             Huobi             23    10093       .2 |
 18. |      GoGreenLight             13    10093       .1 |
     +----------------------------------------------------+
Pages:
Jump to: