In brief
Kaspa keeps nearby valid blocks in a blockDAG and uses consensus rules to reason about ordering and accepted effects.
What this page explains#
Blue score and blue work are progress indicators in the consensus view and need careful explanation before apps use them. This page sits in Consensus, GHOSTDAG, And blockDAG. It gives the topic a plain-language handle first, then shows the working idea, the mechanism, the source trail, and any limits that still matter. This category explains how Kaspa reasons about many blocks without pretending the graph itself is enough. The flow moves from graph shape, to GHOSTDAG classification and ordering, to virtual state and accepted transaction evidence.
The writing follows a simple Kaspa documentation pattern: answer the practical question first, then link outward for details. The closest public sources for this page are WIKI-BLUE-SCORE, RK-GHOSTDAG, RK-HEADER-MODEL, RK-HEADER-PIPELINE. Local notes can help choose what to explain, but public-facing references resolve to upstream websites, repositories, papers, release pages, or docs.
How to think about it#
The practical model starts by naming the layer that owns the topic: wallet use, node operation, consensus, transaction validation, Toccata script behavior, tooling, or research. From there, the page shows which public source can support the explanation and where the explanation becomes incomplete.
For Blue Score And Blue Work, the model is built around these anchors: blue score is not a wallet balance or transaction status; blue work is tied to accumulated work context; headers carry blue score and blue work fields that consensus code validates; apps should anchor state claims to accepted transactions and UTXOs; glossary pages are orientation only. This model is useful, but it does not encode every constant, branch, error type, or edge case. Those details belong in the source path and the source notes.
How it works#
1. blue score is not a wallet balance or transaction status. Blue/red vocabulary belongs to consensus classification, not user reputation or transaction success. Blue score and blue work are progress signals inside the consensus view. They are useful for understanding chain progress and ordering context, but wallet, indexer, and app pages still need accepted-transaction or UTXO evidence before claiming a spend has taken effect.
2. blue work is tied to accumulated work context. Blue/red vocabulary belongs to consensus classification, not user reputation or transaction success. Blue score and blue work are progress signals inside the consensus view. They are useful for understanding chain progress and ordering context, but wallet, indexer, and app pages still need accepted-transaction or UTXO evidence before claiming a spend has taken effect.
3. headers carry blue score and blue work fields that consensus code validates. Blue/red vocabulary belongs to consensus classification, not user reputation or transaction success. Blue score and blue work are progress signals inside the consensus view. They are useful for understanding chain progress and ordering context, but wallet, indexer, and app pages still need accepted-transaction or UTXO evidence before claiming a spend has taken effect.
4. apps should anchor state claims to accepted transactions and UTXOs. Virtual state is the bridge from ordered consensus consequences into the state surfaces that tools can inspect. Mempool visibility says a node is considering a transaction; accepted evidence says the transaction was incorporated through consensus processing. UTXO diffs, accepting data, and indexer replay are the review trail for applications that need durable state.
5. glossary pages are orientation only. Consensus pages separate graph structure, ordering, work signals, and state consequences. A claim in this section is useful only when it says whether the source is describing the DAG shape, GHOSTDAG classification, selected-parent context, virtual-state processing, or research background.
This mechanism section separates graph structure, GHOSTDAG classification, selected-parent context, ordering consequences, and virtual-state effects. A diagram or summary can orient the reader, but implementation paths and KIPs carry high-risk claims.
How to check it#
| Step | Check | Evidence gate |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Check blue score is not a wallet balance or transaction status. | Read WIKI-BLUE-SCORE, RK-GHOSTDAG, RK-HEADER-MODEL; distinguish graph shape, ordering, selected-parent context, and accepted-state consequences. |
| 2 | Check blue work is tied to accumulated work context. | Read WIKI-BLUE-SCORE, RK-GHOSTDAG, RK-HEADER-MODEL; distinguish graph shape, ordering, selected-parent context, and accepted-state consequences. |
| 3 | Check headers carry blue score and blue work fields that consensus code validates. | Read WIKI-BLUE-SCORE, RK-GHOSTDAG, RK-HEADER-MODEL; distinguish graph shape, ordering, selected-parent context, and accepted-state consequences. |
| 4 | Check apps should anchor state claims to accepted transactions and UTXOs. | Read WIKI-BLUE-SCORE, RK-GHOSTDAG, RK-HEADER-MODEL; distinguish graph shape, ordering, selected-parent context, and accepted-state consequences. |
| 5 | Check glossary pages are orientation only. | Read WIKI-BLUE-SCORE, RK-GHOSTDAG, RK-HEADER-MODEL; distinguish graph shape, ordering, selected-parent context, and accepted-state consequences. |
When using this page for consensus explanation, identify whether the claim is about graph shape, GHOSTDAG classification, selected-parent context, virtual-state processing, or transaction consequences. Diagrams are orientation aids; source paths and KIPs carry the high-risk behavior claims.
Related Pages#
- selected-parent-and-mergesets
- consensus-blockdag-ghostdag
- virtual-state-and-accepted-transactions