Papers for

cryptocurrency platform operators

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Exponential EIP-1559 parameters set to ensure predictable blockchain fees

The Economic Security of Exponential EIP-1559

Abstract: We consider the problem of parameter selection for EIP-1559, a widely used gas pricing mechanism for blockchains. As opposed to previous work, we aim to achieve economic security, where the chosen parameters guarantee a lower bound on total collected gas fees whenever usage over a given time window exceeds a specified threshold. This bound can be set prohibitively high, thereby economically deterring usage above a desired level. Such guarantees are particularly relevant to long-term objectives such as limiting state growth. We apply our approach to the pure exponential version of EIP-1559 which Ethereum uses and to a variant used by Robinhood Chain and Arbitrum. To achieve economic security, we first characterize the revenue-minimizing gas-usage distribution for the exponential version and for the other variant we construct a distribution whose associated fee revenue provably approximates the minimum. Using these results, we then demonstrate how to set economically secure mechanism parameters for both variants and we discuss the associated tradeoffs.

Wed 7 OctComputer Science and Game TheoryCryptography and SecurityDistributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing
The gist
Blockchains use methods to decide how much users pay to get their transactions processed, which affects how much the system earns. This paper looks at one popular fee system called EIP-1559 and finds ways to set its settings so that the blockchain guarantees a minimum fee income when usage is high. This helps to discourage too much usage that could cause problems like excessive data growth. The authors analyze two versions of this fee system, including the one Ethereum uses, and explain how to choose settings that balance security and practical tradeoffs.
Open → 2610.10333v1

Blockchain protocol reduces honest nodes needed to prevent double spending

STAKE: Preventing a colluding majority from double spending

Abstract: Blockchains typically operate in open networks where it is hard to control the delay of messages. While classic blockchain protocols assumed synchrony, newer protocols try to remain secure despite unexpected network delays. Unfortunately, in the traditional model where $n$ participants can either be honest or Byzantine, we need a supermajority, or $\lfloor 2n/3\rfloor + 1$, of them to be honest. Recent work have explored the question of reducing the number of needed honest nodes in a game theory model to a majority sometimes by introducing $k$ rational players and $t$ Byzantine players. Yet, to our knowledge, no blockchain protocol managed to reduce it further. In this paper, we offer a blockchain protocol called Secure and Tolerant Algorithm through ($k,t$)-robust Equilibrium (STAKE) that works with only $\lfloor n/3\rfloor + 1$ honest players. STAKE requires each consensus participant to stake a sufficiently large amount $s$ compared to their liquidity $\ell$. We show that the probability that a coalition manages to execute $ζ$ double spending attacks (we call them a $ζ$-uple attack) drops polynomially fast with $ζ$. This allows us to demonstrate that STAKE reaches a ($k,t$)-robust equilibrium, or that rational players do not collude with Byzantine, even with a relatively low $s/\ell$ ratio.

Thu 1 OctComputer Science and Game Theory
The gist
Blockchains usually need most participants to be honest to avoid fraud like double spending. This paper presents a new blockchain protocol called STAKE that can work securely even if only about a third of participants are honest. It achieves this by requiring participants to put up a stake related to their resources, making attacks less profitable and less likely. The authors show the chance of repeated double spending attacks drops quickly, discouraging dishonest collusion.
Open → 2610.01169v1

Token names have little effect on buyer profits or market value

Names without information: Attention allocation and rent transfer in a zero-fundamental token market

Abstract: Asset names are associated with investor trading and asset prices, but where names and issuer quality are formed jointly, information, preference and attention-coordination explanations are difficult to distinguish. We study a token launchpad on which tokens issued under the default template use the same contract code, have a fixed supply and carry no cash flows, while names can be registered at almost no cost, cannot be verified and may be reused. Using all 458,174 default-template tokens launched from February to June 2026 and a sample split by creator entity fixed in advance, we find that the share of tokens attracting an outside buyer rises from 34.9% to 52.8% across name-appeal deciles, but within creator and creation minute the effect of appeal is small and does not replicate in the validation sample. Conditional on early capital inflow and creator fixed effects, the residual effects of names on migration, peak market capitalization and post-peak drawdown are statistically equivalent to zero, and buyers who follow appealing names earn no economically meaningful premium. The same name attracts less capital with each reuse, names whose first token draws more capital are copied sooner, and competition over names mainly transfers wealth among buyers.

Thu 1 OctComputational Engineering, Finance, and Science
The gist
Many new tokens share the same code and have no cash value, but can have different names that investors see. The authors studied over 458,000 tokens and found that while tokens with appealing names attract slightly more buyers, the names do not lead to higher profits or bigger token markets when other factors are controlled. Also, reusing a name causes it to attract less investment over time. Overall, competition for popular token names mainly shifts money among buyers without creating real gains.
Open → 2610.01106v1