Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Searcher Competition in Block Building

Published 10 Jul 2024 in cs.GT | (2407.07474v1)

Abstract: We study the amount of maximal extractable value (MEV) captured by validators, as a function of searcher competition, in blockchains with competitive block building markets such as Ethereum. We argue that the core is a suitable solution concept in this context that makes robust predictions that are independent of implementation details or specific mechanisms chosen. We characterize how much value validators extract in the core and quantify the surplus share of validators as a function of searcher competition. Searchers can obtain at most the marginal value increase of the winning block relative to the best block that can be built without their bundles. Dually this gives a lower bound on the value extracted by the validator. If arbitrages are easy to find and many searchers find similar bundles, the validator gets paid all value almost surely, while searchers can capture most value if there is little searcher competition per arbitrage. For the case of passive block-proposers we study, moreover, mechanisms that implement core allocations in dominant strategies and find that for submodular value, there is a unique dominant-strategy incentive compatible core-selecting mechanism that gives each searcher exactly their marginal value contribution to the winning block. We validate our theoretical prediction empirically with aggregate bundle data and find a significant positive relation between the number of submitted backruns for the same opportunity and the median value captured by the proposer from the opportunity.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (17)
  1. Centralization in block building and proposer-builder separation. CoRR, abs/2401.12120, 2024.
  2. Transaction fee mechanism design in a post-mev world. Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2024.
  3. Who gets the maximal extractable value? A dynamic sharing blockchain mechanism. In Mehdi Dastani, Jaime Simão Sichman, Natasha Alechina, and Virginia Dignum, editors, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2024, Auckland, New Zealand, May 6-10, 2024, pages 2171–2173. ACM, 2024.
  4. Proposer-builder separation, payment for order flows, and centralization in blockchain. Payment for Order Flows, and Centralization in Blockchain (February 12, 2024), 2024.
  5. Flash boys 2.0: Frontrunning in decentralized exchanges, miner extractable value, and consensus instability. In 2020 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, SP 2020, San Francisco, CA, USA, May 18-21, 2020, pages 910–927. IEEE, 2020.
  6. Core-selecting package auctions. international Journal of game Theory, 36(3-4):393–407, 2008.
  7. Fair payments for efficient allocations in public sector combinatorial auctions. Management science, 53(9):1389–1406, 2007.
  8. Sok: Transparent dishonesty: front-running attacks on blockchain.
  9. Donald B. Gillies. Solutions to general non-zero-sum games. Contributions to the Theory of Games IV. Annals of Mathematics Studies, 40:47–85, 1959.
  10. Non-atomic arbitrage in decentralized finance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.01622, 2024.
  11. Hervé Moulin. Axioms of cooperative decision making. Number 15. Cambridge university press, 1991.
  12. Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading. Journal of Economic Theory, 29(2):265–281, 1983.
  13. Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
  14. Structural advantages for integrated builders in mev-boost. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.09083, 2023.
  15. Two Folk Manipulability Theorems in the General One-to-one Two-sided Matching Markets with Money. FEA/USP, 2013.
  16. The assignment game i: The core. International Journal of Game Theory, 1971.
  17. Decentralization of ethereum’s builder market. CoRR, abs/2405.01329, 2024.
Citations (1)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We found no open problems mentioned in this paper.

Continue Learning

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

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 16 tweets with 93 likes about this paper.