IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2103.14144.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Dynamic Posted-Price Mechanisms for the Blockchain Transaction Fee Market

Author

Listed:
  • Matheus V. X. Ferreira
  • Daniel J. Moroz
  • David C. Parkes
  • Mitchell Stern

Abstract

In recent years, prominent blockchain systems such as Bitcoin and Ethereum have experienced explosive growth in transaction volume, leading to frequent surges in demand for limited block space and causing transaction fees to fluctuate by orders of magnitude. Existing systems sell space using first-price auctions; however, users find it difficult to estimate how much they need to bid in order to get their transactions accepted onto the chain. If they bid too low, their transactions can have long confirmation times. If they bid too high, they pay larger fees than necessary. In light of these issues, new transaction fee mechanisms have been proposed, most notably EIP-1559, aiming to provide better usability. EIP-1559 is a history-dependent mechanism that relies on block utilization to adjust a base fee. We propose an alternative design -- a {\em dynamic posted-price mechanism} -- which uses not only block utilization but also observable bids from past blocks to compute a posted price for subsequent blocks. We show its potential to reduce price volatility by providing examples for which the prices of EIP-1559 are unstable while the prices of the proposed mechanism are stable. More generally, whenever the demand for the blockchain stabilizes, we ask if our mechanism is able to converge to a stable state. Our main result provides sufficient conditions in a probabilistic setting for which the proposed mechanism is approximately welfare optimal and the prices are stable. Our main technical contribution towards establishing stability is an iterative algorithm that, given oracle access to a Lipschitz continuous and strictly concave function $f$, converges to a fixed point of $f$.

Suggested Citation

  • Matheus V. X. Ferreira & Daniel J. Moroz & David C. Parkes & Mitchell Stern, 2021. "Dynamic Posted-Price Mechanisms for the Blockchain Transaction Fee Market," Papers 2103.14144, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2103.14144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.14144
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Edelman & Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2007. "Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction: Selling Billions of Dollars Worth of Keywords," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 242-259, March.
    2. Mohammad Akbarpour & Shengwu Li, 2020. "Credible Auctions: A Trilemma," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 425-467, March.
    3. John Kennan, 2001. "Uniqueness of Positive Fixed Points for Increasing Concave Functions on Rn: An Elementary Result," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 4(4), pages 893-899, October.
    4. Goldberg, Andrew V. & Hartline, Jason D. & Karlin, Anna R. & Saks, Michael & Wright, Andrew, 2006. "Competitive auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 242-269, May.
    5. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Matheus V. X. Ferreira & Ye Lin Sally Hahn & S. Matthew Weinberg & Catherine Yu, 2022. "Optimal Strategic Mining Against Cryptographic Self-Selection in Proof-of-Stake," Papers 2207.07996, arXiv.org.
    2. Matheus V. X. Ferreira & S. Matthew Weinberg, 2021. "Proof-of-Stake Mining Games with Perfect Randomness," Papers 2107.04069, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2021.
    3. Yulin Liu & Yuxuan Lu & Kartik Nayak & Fan Zhang & Luyao Zhang & Yinhong Zhao, 2022. "Empirical Analysis of EIP-1559: Transaction Fees, Waiting Time, and Consensus Security," Papers 2201.05574, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    4. Luyao Zhang & Fan Zhang, 2023. "Understand Waiting Time in Transaction Fee Mechanism: An Interdisciplinary Perspective," Papers 2305.02552, arXiv.org.
    5. Matheus V. X. Ferreira & David C. Parkes, 2022. "Credible Decentralized Exchange Design via Verifiable Sequencing Rules," Papers 2209.15569, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    6. Maryam Bahrani & Pranav Garimidi & Tim Roughgarden, 2023. "Transaction Fee Mechanism Design with Active Block Producers," Papers 2307.01686, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    7. Hao Chung & Elaine Shi, 2021. "Foundations of Transaction Fee Mechanism Design," Papers 2111.03151, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2022.
    8. Kim, Daehan & Ryu, Doojin & Webb, Robert I., 2023. "Determination of equilibrium transaction fees in the Bitcoin network: A rank-order contest," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    9. Hao Chung & Tim Roughgarden & Elaine Shi, 2024. "Collusion-Resilience in Transaction Fee Mechanism Design," Papers 2402.09321, arXiv.org.
    10. Meryem Essaidi & Matheus V. X. Ferreira & S. Matthew Weinberg, 2022. "Credible, Strategyproof, Optimal, and Bounded Expected-Round Single-Item Auctions for all Distributions," Papers 2205.14758, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexander Teytelboym & Shengwu Li & Scott Duke Kominers & Mohammad Akbarpour & Piotr Dworczak, 2021. "Discovering Auctions: Contributions of Paul Milgrom and Robert Wilson," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(3), pages 709-750, July.
    2. Shuchi Chawla & Jason D. Hartline & Denis Nekipelov, 2016. "A/B Testing of Auctions," Papers 1606.00908, arXiv.org.
    3. Devanur, Nikhil R. & Hartline, Jason D. & Yan, Qiqi, 2015. "Envy freedom and prior-free mechanism design," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 103-143.
    4. Chen, Ning & Ghosh, Arpita & Lambert, Nicolas S., 2014. "Auctions for social lending: A theoretical analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 367-391.
    5. Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M., 2020. "Asymptotically optimal prior-free clock auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    6. Hamid Nazerzadeh & Amin Saberi & Rakesh Vohra, 2013. "Dynamic Pay-Per-Action Mechanisms and Applications to Online Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 98-111, February.
    7. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    8. Frank Kelly & Peter Key & Neil Walton, 2016. "Efficient Advert Assignment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 822-837, August.
    9. Ming Chen & Sareh Nabi & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2023. "Advancing Ad Auction Realism: Practical Insights & Modeling Implications," Papers 2307.11732, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    10. Ying-Ju Chen, 2017. "Optimal Dynamic Auctions for Display Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 897-913, August.
    11. Mahsa Derakhshan & Negin Golrezaei & Renato Paes Leme, 2022. "Linear Program-Based Approximation for Personalized Reserve Prices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(3), pages 1849-1864, March.
    12. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2020. "On the Benefits of Set-Asides," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1655-1696.
    13. Sameer Mehta & Milind Dawande & Ganesh Janakiraman & Vijay Mookerjee, 2020. "Sustaining a Good Impression: Mechanisms for Selling Partitioned Impressions at Ad Exchanges," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 126-147, March.
    14. Andrew Komo & Scott Duke Kominers & Tim Roughgarden, 2024. "Shill-Proof Auctions," Papers 2404.00475, arXiv.org.
    15. José Alcalde & Matthias Dahm, "undated". "Supplier Diversity before the Time of Cholera," Discussion Papers in Economics 20/07, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    16. Axel Ockenfels & David Reiley & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2006. "Online Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. W. Jason Choi & Amin Sayedi, 2019. "Learning in Online Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 584-608, July.
    18. Eric Bax, 2020. "Heavy Tails Make Happy Buyers," Papers 2002.09014, arXiv.org.
    19. Satoru Fujishige & Zaifu Yang, 2020. "A Universal Dynamic Auction for Unimodular Demand Types: An Efficient Auction Design for Various Kinds of Indivisible Commodities," Discussion Papers 20/08, Department of Economics, University of York.
    20. Estrella Alonso & Joaquín Sánchez-Soriano & Juan Tejada, 2020. "Mixed Mechanisms for Auctioning Ranked Items," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-26, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2103.14144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.