Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
GPT-4o
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
o3 Pro
GPT-4.1 Pro
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
2000 character limit reached

Serial Monopoly on Blockchains with Quasi-patient Users (2405.17334v3)

Published 27 May 2024 in cs.GT

Abstract: In the face of limited block size, miners (e.g., in Bitcoin) prioritize high-bid transactions, forming a large part of their revenue. If the block size were to expand significantly, meeting all transaction demand due to infrastructure or protocol improvements, bids could drop to zero or to a minimum fee, reducing mining incentives and potentially affecting security. To address this, Lavi et al. (2022) introduced a monopolistic pricing mechanism where miners only include transactions paying a minimum price, ensuring some revenue but resulting in an unbounded loss in welfare. Nisan (2023) expands this by modeling bidders as patient, who wait indefinitely long for lower prices, causing price fluctuations even with stable demand. In order to capture users' diminishing interest in having their transactions added to the ledger over time, we consider a more realistic setting with quasi-patient users, where only a fraction $\delta \in [0,1]$ of pending transactions remains in the next round. This richer model encompasses both Lavi et al.'s impatient users ($\delta=0$) and Nisan's patient users ($\delta=1$) as special cases. We demonstrate that Nisan's fluctuating dynamics persist for $\delta$ close to 1, while for $\delta$ close to 0, the dynamics resemble the impatient case. For $\delta \in (0,1)$, we establish new bounds on price dynamics, revealing unexpected effects. Unlike the fully patient case, the bounds of the dynamics for $\delta<1$ depend on the demand curve and undergo a "transition phase". For some $\delta$, the model mirrors the fully patient setting, and for smaller $\delta' < \delta$, it stabilizes at the highest monopolist price, thus collapsing to the impatient case. We provide quantitative bounds and analytical results, showing that the bounds for $\delta=1$ are generally not tight for $\delta<1$, and we give guarantees on the minimum ("admission") price for transactions.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (14)
  1. Towards a functional fee market for cryptocurrencies. CoRR, abs/1901.06830, 2019.
  2. Transaction fee mechanism design in a post-mev world. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Paper 2024/331, 2024. https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/331.
  3. Collusion-resilience in transaction fee mechanism design, 2024.
  4. Foundations of transaction fee mechanism design. In Proceedings of the 2023 Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 3856–3899, 2023.
  5. Bayesian mechanism design for blockchain transaction fee allocation, 2024.
  6. Dynamic posted-price mechanisms for the blockchain transaction-fee market. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies, AFT ’21, page 86–99, New York, NY, USA, 2021. Association for Computing Machinery.
  7. Tiered mechanisms for blockchain transaction fees. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06014, 2023.
  8. Dynamical analysis of the eip-1559 ethereum fee market. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies, pages 114–126, 2021.
  9. Optimality despite chaos in fee markets. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 346–362. Springer, 2023.
  10. Redesigning bitcoin’s fee market. ACM Trans. Econ. Comput., 10(1), may 2022.
  11. Noam Nisan. Serial monopoly on blockchains. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.12731, 2023.
  12. Tim Roughgarden. Transaction fee mechanism design. SIGecom Exch., 19(1):52–55, jul 2021.
  13. Transaction fees on a honeymoon: Ethereum’s eip-1559 one month later. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain (Blockchain), pages 196–204. IEEE, 2021.
  14. Andrew Chi-Chih Yao. An incentive analysis of some bitcoin fee designs. CoRR, abs/1811.02351, 2018.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.