Quote

Till date, the continuous development of the blockchain consensus protocol is broadly divided into three systems: Proof of Work (PoW), Proof of Stake (PoS), and Byzantine Fault Tolerant (BFT).

the BFT has nothing to do here. the BFT is about a commander node that initiates a command to other nodes (a miner claims that has solved the difficulty of a block and propagates it to other nodes). when you try to begin the proof model from block level to the transaction level, you need to follow the Chinese General Problem, that each node has its own value/command to propagate to the entire network. read about "PoCo" here in bitcointalk.

Quote

Utilizing network dispersity to gather stakes can provide a non-simulatable competitive mechanism while achieving the goal of making majority of the users active at the same time.

I afraid this parameter could fabricate easily. would you please elaborate this mechanism?

Quote

Thus, if the branch obtains more than half of the total stakes of the whole system within a voting cycle, it is impossible to have a competitive branch. We denoted the branch as Finalized, and the block at the root of the branch as save point. Any historical attacks that occur before the save point will be rejected; Thus, the NaS problem is solved.

while your voting model doesn't fit in opportunity cost context, your model still suffers from N@S. this save point in your proposal just works as same as checksum in bitcoin. checksum doesn't solve anything. for new possible solutions, read about "flash-back-pinning" here in bitcointalk.

Quote

Conflict of Interest
Patent NO. : CN201811633256.0

would you please give more information about it?