Permissionless Proof-of-Stake (PoS) economic security is predicated on the high cost of violating consensus safety or liveness. We show that liquid staking introduces additional risks that are not captured by standard PoS economic security arguments. Through an empirical study of Ethereum data, we find that the operational performance of liquid staking pools is positively associated with subsequent normalized liquid staking token (LST) returns. Motivated by this, we present a cross-layer attack: a low-stake adversary can manipulate the consensus protocol to degrade a target pool's performance and take application-layer positions that profit if the market reprices the corresponding \gls{LST} in-line with the historically observed association. To make the consensus layer manipulation concrete, we develop a deep reinforcement learning (DRL) framework to automatically discover attack strategies. Our evaluation shows that the learned strategies can recover near-optimal theoretical attacks and uncover new manipulation behaviors that significantly degrade target pool performance. We further characterize feasible application-layer monetization channels and analyze leveraged shorting in detail using Monte Carlo simulations, showing that such attacks can be profitable with over one-half probability for LSTs of major staking pools. Our findings reveal a previously overlooked attack surface in PoS systems with liquid staking and expose a gap between consensus and economic security.
The rapid collapse of decentralized game economies, often characterized by the \textit{death spiral,} remains the most formidable barrier to the mass adoption of Web3 gaming. This paper proposes that the sustainability of an open game economy is predicated on three necessary and sufficient conditions: Anti-Sybil Resilience, Anti-Capital Dominance, and Anti-Inflationary Saturation. The first section establishes a theoretical proof of these conditions, arguing that the absence of any single dimension leads to systemic failure. The second section explores the dialectical relationship between these dimensions, illustrating how unchecked automation and capital-driven monopolies accelerate asset hyperinflation. In the third section, we introduce the Identity-Bound Asset Integrity Model (IBAIM) as a comprehensive technical solution. IBAIM utilizes Zero-Knowledge (ZK) biometric hashing and Account Abstraction (AA) to anchor asset utility to unique human identities through a privacy-preserving and regulatory-compliant architecture. By exogenizing biometric verification to trusted local environments and utilizing Zero-Knowledge Proofs of Identity (zk-PoI), the model ensures absolute user privacy. Furthermore, by implementing an Asymmetric Utility Decay (AUD) engine-whereby assets suffer a vertical 50% utility cliff upon secondary transfer-and an entropy-driven thermodynamic degradation mechanism., the model successfully decouples financial speculation from in-game merit. Finally, we apply this framework to analyze prominent historical failures in the GameFi sector, demonstrating that their collapse was an inevitable consequence of violating these core economic constraints. Our findings suggest that trading a degree of asset liquidity for system integrity is the only viable path toward long-term economic viability in decentralized virtual worlds.
Automated matching engines execute millions of orders per session, yet systematic asymmetries in latency, order size, and market access compound into persistent execution disparities that erode participant trust. We formulate provably fair order matching as a Constrained Markov Decision Process and propose CPO-FOAM (Constrained Policy Optimization with Feedback-Optimized Adaptive Margins). An inner loop computes an analytic trust-region step on the Fisher information manifold; a PID-controlled outer loop dynamically tightens safety margins, suppressing the sawtooth oscillations endemic to Lagrangian methods under non-stationary dynamics. Group fairness (demographic parity, equalized odds) enters the CMDP cost vector while individual Lipschitz fairness is enforced deterministically via spectral normalization. We prove BIBO stability and that the integral term drives steady-state violations to zero. On LOBSTER NASDAQ data across six market regimes, CPO-FOAM recovers 95.9% of unconstrained throughput at 2.5% constraint violation frequency; on crypto-asset LOB data under MEV injection it captures 98.4% of the reward envelope at 3.2% CVF. The method scales sub-linearly to M=8 constraints, settles on-chain within one Ethereum block, and yields a 2.1X reward improvement on Safety-Gymnasium, confirming domain-agnostic generalization.
The value of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies critically depends on miners having incentives to follow the protocol. However, the Bitcoin mining protocol proposed by Nakamoto (2008) and implemented in practice is well known not to constitute an equilibrium: Eyal and Sirer (2018) construct a profitable deviation called ``selfish mining'' which relies on strategically delaying disclosure of newly mined blocks rather than publishing them immediately. We propose inertial mining, a novel mining protocol. When miners follow inertial mining, they produce the outcome intended by Nakamoto, i.e., a single longest chain. But unlike the Bitcoin mining protocol, inertial mining constitutes an equilibrium (assuming no miner controls more than half of the mining power). Indeed, neither selfish mining nor any other deviation is profitable. Furthermore, inertial mining only changes miners' behavior in the event of off-path forks, and can be implemented in Bitcoin without any changes to its consensus mechanism or blockchain architecture.
Randomness beacons based on Verifiable Delay Functions (VDFs) are increasingly proposed for blockchains and distributed systems, promising publicly verifiable delay and bias resistance. Existing analyses, however, treat adversaries purely as cryptographic entities and overlook that real attackers are economically motivated. A VDF may be sequentially secure, yet still vulnerable if a rational adversary can profit by purchasing faster hardware and exploiting reward spikes such as MEV opportunities. We develop a formal framework for economic security of VDF-based randomness beacons. Modeling the attacker as a rational agent facing hardware speedup, operating costs, and stochastic rewards, we cast the attack decision as an optimal-stopping problem and prove that optimal behavior has a monotone threshold structure. This yields tight necessary and sufficient conditions relating delay parameters to adversarial cost and reward distributions. We extend the analysis to grinding, selective abort, and multi-adversary competition, demonstrating how each amplifies effective rewards and increases required delays. Using realistic cloud costs, hardware benchmarks, and MEV data, we show that many proposed VDF delays, on the order of a few seconds, are economically insecure under plausible conditions. We conclude with deployable guidelines and introduce Economically Secure Delay Parameters (ESDPs) to support principled parameter selection in practical systems.
Sarisht Wadhwa, Aviv Yaish, Fan Zhang, Kartik Nayak
Modern blockchains increasingly rely on parallel execution to improve throughput. We show several industry and academic transaction fee mechanisms (TFMs) struggle to simultaneously account for execution parallelism while remaining performant and fair. First, if parallelism affects fees, adversarial protocol manipulations that offset possible benefits to throughput by introducing fake transactions become rational: users can insert functionally useless parallel transactions solely to reduce fees, and schedulers can create useless sequential transactions to increase revenue. Execution contingency, a core feature of expressive programming languages, both exacerbates the aforementioned threats and introduces new ones: (1) users may overpay for unused resources, and (2) scheduler revenue is harmed when reserved scheduling slots go unused due to contingency. We introduce a framework for this challenging setting, and prove an impossibility, highlighting an inherent tension: both parallelism and contingency involve a trade-off between minimizing risks for users and schedulers, as favoring one comes at the expense of the other. To complete the picture, we introduce a fee mechanisms and prove that they achieve the boundaries of this trade-off. Our results provide rigorous foundations for evaluating designs advanced by notable blockchains, such as Sui and Monad.
We present a formal treatment of provenance trees, directed acyclic graphs of artifact registrations anchored immutably on a public blockchain, and introduce the operator trust problem: when a single privileged operator submits all on-chain registrations on behalf of users, the on-chain record alone cannot distinguish user-initiated registrations from unilateral operator actions. We resolve this through a dual-layer cryptographic commitment scheme in which two commitments derived from a single client-side secret key, binding the key to the tree root and to each unique registration identifier, make false attribution claims strictly dominated strategies. We prove correctness under standard cryptographic assumptions and establish honest behavior as the unique Nash equilibrium without relying on operator trust. We further introduce and analyze the tree poisoning problem: adversarial attacks on users' provenance trees via fraudulent root registration, malicious child attachment, and tree identity spoofing. We characterize the closure properties of each attack variant and prove that a complete provenance tree integrity model requires three distinct mechanisms: cryptographic priority, governance cascade, and contract enforcement, each necessary and none individually sufficient. The construction is deployed on Base (Ethereum L2) as AnchorRegistry, an immutable on-chain provenance registry. We provide gas complexity analysis demonstrating O(1) cost invariant to registry scale, and a trustless reconstruction algorithm recovering the complete registry from public event logs alone.
On high-throughput, low-fee blockchains, a qualitatively new form of maximal extractable value (MEV) has emerged: searchers submit large volumes of speculative transactions, whose profitability is resolved only at execution time. We refer to this as spam MEV. On major rollups, it can at times consume more than half of block gas, even though only a small fraction of probes ultimately results in a trade. Despite growing awareness of this phenomenon, there is no principled framework for understanding how blockchain design parameters shape its prevalence and impact. We develop such a framework, modeling spam transactions competing for on-chain opportunities under a competitive equilibrium that drives their profits to zero, and deriving equilibrium spam volumes as a function of block capacity, minimum gas price, and the transaction fee mechanism. Empirical evidence from Base and Arbitrum supports the model: spam grew sharply as block capacity was scaled up and fell when minimum gas prices were introduced. Our analysis yields three main insights. First, spam is always costly: when block capacity is scarce, it displaces users and drives up gas prices; as block capacity grows, it increasingly consumes execution resources, raising network externality, i.e., the cost of provisioning and processing blocks. We show that spam takes an increasing share of each additional unit of block capacity, so capping it before all users are included creates a favorable trade-off: forgoing a small amount of user welfare eliminates disproportionate spam and externality. Second, we extend the analysis to priority fee ordering and show that ordering transactions by gas price helps reduce spam, as spammers must pay more to reach early block positions. Third, as user demand grows and blockspace is scaled accordingly, spam's share of block capacity plateaus rather than growing indefinitely.
We study binary decision-making in governance councils of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), where experts choose between two alternatives on behalf of the organization. We introduce an information structure model for such councils and formalize desired properties in blockchain governance. We propose a mechanism assuming an evaluation tool that ex-post returns a boolean indicating success or failure, implementable via smart contracts. Experts hold two types of private information: idiosyncratic preferences over alternatives and subjective beliefs about which is more likely to benefit the organization. The designer's objective is to select the best alternative by aggregating expert beliefs, framed as a classification problem. The mechanism collects preferences and computes monetary transfers accordingly, then applies additional transfers contingent on the boolean outcome. For aligned experts, the mechanism is dominant strategy incentive compatible. For unaligned experts, we prove a Safe Deviation property: no expert can profitably deviate toward an alternative they believe is less likely to succeed. Our main result decomposes the sum of reports into idiosyncratic noise and a linearly pooled belief signal whose sign matches the designer's optimal decision. The pooling weights arise endogenously from equilibrium strategies, and correct classification is achieved whenever the per-expert budget exceeds a threshold that decreases as experts' beliefs converge.
Blockchain protocols often seek to procure computationally challenging work from a decentralized set of participants. While there are simple procurement auctions that result in the minimal cost of acquisition and maximal efficiency, they also lead to concentration in the provider set due to the winner-take-all market structure. We design and analyze single-good procurement auctions that balance social-cost minimization (at the extreme, a winner-take-all auction) with decentralization (at the extreme, a uniform allocation). We first give a dominant-strategy incentive-compatible (DSIC) mechanism explicitly designed to implement non-winner-take-all allocations. Our allocation rule uniquely solves an optimization with respect to a modified social-cost metric that penalizes large, single-player concentrations and is parameterized with a curvature value, $α$, with $α\rightarrow 0$ implementing the uniform allocation and $α\rightarrow \infty$ implementing the winner-take-all allocation. We further quantify the loss in social cost of this mechanism as a function of $α$. We then propose two alternative mechanisms, each addressing a limitation of the DSIC mechanism, namely a lack of Sybil-resistance and a complex payment rule. First, we examine a variation of Tullock contests to achieve a non-winner-take-all Sybil-proof procurement mechanism. Second, we consider a mechanism with the same allocation rule as the DSIC mechanism but with an alternative payment rule in which producers are simply paid proportionally to their bids. This provides a much simpler payment rule which, while not DSIC, still results in the mechanism being ex-post ``safe'' (where there exists a bidding strategy that is guaranteed to result in non-negative utility) for participating bidders. For both non-DSIC mechanisms, we characterize the equilibrium allocations and prove price of anarchy bounds.
Burak Öz, Christoph Schlegel, Akaki Mamageishvili
We study Arbitrum's Timeboost mechanism following the adoption of Kairos by its main users -- Wintermute and Selini Capital -- to understand how the emergence of a just-in-time secondary market affects the dynamics of an ahead-of-time primary auction. We find that competition in the primary auction declines significantly and that Arbitrum captures a smaller share of the value generated around Timeboost. After the transition, paid bids in the primary auction correspond to only 14.8\% of the highest bid (compared with nearly 62.7\% in the \textit{Pre-Kairos} era) and to a smaller share of searcher profit-and-loss (PnL), even though total PnL remains of similar magnitude across regimes. While the exact distribution of the remaining surplus between searchers and Kairos remains unclear, the evidence suggests that a substantial share is no longer captured through the primary auction. More broadly, our findings suggest that ahead-of-time allocation mechanisms may be particularly vulnerable to secondary-market intermediation when competition among dominant participants is weak. We conclude by outlining possible ways for Arbitrum to improve revenue capture and discussing how these lessons may apply to Ethereum L1.
Bruno Mazorra, Christoph Schlegel, Akaki Mamageishvili
There are $n$ players who compete by timing their actions. An opportunity appears randomly on a time interval. Whoever takes an action the fastest after the opportunity has arisen wins. The occurrence of the opportunity is observed only with a delay. Taking actions is costly. We characterize the unique symmetric equilibrium of this game and study worst-case inefficiency of equilibria. Our main motivation is the study of ``probabilistic backrunning" on blockchains, where arbitrageurs want to place an order immediately after a trade that impacts the price on an exchange or after an oracle update. In this context, the number of actions taken can be interpreted as a measure of costly ``spam" generated to compete for the opportunity.
Blockchains are widely used for secure transaction processing, but their scalability remains limited, and existing multichain designs are typically static even as demand and capacity shift. We cast blockchain configuration as a multiagent resource-allocation problem: applications and operators declare demand, capacity, and price bounds; an optimizer groups them into ephemeral chains each epoch and sets a chain-level clearing price. The objective maximizes a governance-weighted combination of normalized utilities for applications, operators, and the system. The model is modular -- accommodating capability compatibility, application-type diversity, and epoch-to-epoch stability -- and can be solved off-chain with outcomes verifiable on-chain. We analyze fairness and incentive issues and present simulations that highlight trade-offs among throughput, decentralization, operator yield, and service stability.
The past decade has witnessed the burgeoning and continuous development of blockchain and its applications. Besides various cryptocurrencies, an industry that has quickly embraced this trend is gaming. Thanks to the support of blockchain, games have started to incorporate non-fungible tokens (NFTs) that can enable a new gaming model, play-to-earn (P2E), which incentivizes users to participate and play. While recent studies looked at several NFT games qualitatively and individually, an in-depth understanding is still missing, particularly on how the P2E model has transformed traditional games. In this work, we set to conduct a measurement study of NFT games, aiming to gain a comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness of P2E in practice. For this purpose, we collect and analyze relevant NFT transaction data from the underlying blockchain (e.g., Ethereum) of 12 games, supplemented with various data scraped from their websites. Our study shows that (1) a few top wallets control unproportionally high percentage of NFTs, and the majority of wallets own only one or two NFTs and do not actively trade; (2) promotion events do boost the trade amount and the NFT price for some games, but their effect does not sustain; and (3) few players actually earned a profit, and players in 9 out of 12 games who traded NFTs have a negative profit on average. Motivated by these findings, we further investigate effective incentive mechanisms based on game theory to improve the trading profits that players can earn from these NFT games. Both modeling and simulation results confirm the effectiveness of the proposed incentive mechanism.
Propagation latency is inherent to any distributed network, including blockchains. Typically, blockchain protocols provide a timing buffer for block propagation across the network. In leader-based blockchains, the leader -- block proposer -- is known in advance for each slot. A fast (or low-latency) proposer may delay the block proposal in anticipation of more rewards from the transactions that would otherwise be included in the subsequent block. Deploying such a strategy by manipulating the timing is known as timing games. It increases the risk of missed blocks due to reduced time for other nodes to vote on the block, affecting the overall efficiency of the blockchain. Moreover, proposers who play timing games essentially appropriate MEV (additional rewards over transaction fees and the block reward) that would otherwise accrue to the next block, making it unfair to subsequent block proposers. We propose a double-block proposal mechanism, 2-Prop, to curtail timing games. 2-Prop selects two proposers per slot to propose blocks and confirms one of them. We design a reward-sharing policy for proposers based on how quickly their blocks propagate to avoid strategic deviations. In the induced game, which we call the Latency Game, we show that it is a Nash Equilibrium for the proposers to propose the block without delay under homogeneous network settings. Under heterogeneous network settings, we study many configurations, and our analysis shows that a faster proposer would prefer not to delay unless the other proposer is extremely slow. Thus, we show the efficacy of 2-Prop in mitigating the effect of timing games.
We present a novel framework for analyzing blockchain consensus mechanisms by modeling blockchain growth as a Partially Observable Stochastic Game (POSG) which we reduce to a set of Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (POMDPs) through the use of the mean field approximation. This approach formalizes the decision-making process of miners in Proof-of-Work (PoW) systems and enables a principled examination of block selection strategies as well as steady state analysis of the induced Markov chain. By leveraging a mean field game formulation, we efficiently characterize the information asymmetries that arise in asynchronous blockchain networks. Our first main result is an exact characterization of the tradeoff between network delay and PoW efficiency--the fraction of blocks which end up in the longest chain. We demonstrate that the tradeoff observed in our model at steady state aligns closely with theoretical findings, validating our use of the mean field approximation. Our second main result is a rigorous equilibrium analysis of the Longest Chain Rule (LCR). We show that the LCR is a mean field equilibrium and that it is uniquely optimal in maximizing PoW efficiency under certain mild assumptions. This result provides the first formal justification for continued use of the LCR in decentralized consensus protocols, offering both theoretical validation and practical insights. Beyond these core results, our framework supports flexible experimentation with alternative block selection strategies, system dynamics, and reward structures. It offers a systematic and scalable substitute for expensive test-net deployments or ad hoc analysis. While our primary focus is on Nakamoto-style blockchains, the model is general enough to accommodate other architectures through modifications to the underlying MDP.
Bitcoin's block reward is scheduled to decline to zero, raising concerns about whether the network can remain secure once miners rely solely on transaction fees. This paper seeks to identify the conditions under which large-scale and persistent deviation from honest mining can arise. We analyze and compare the payoffs of honest and deviating miners in a sequential decision model, and identify a deviation threshold $G_t$ at which honest mining ceases to be privately optimal. Around the 2024 Bitcoin halving, we show that current mining behavior does not exhibit large-scale or structural deviation. However, when the block reward is removed, the $G_t$ criterion implies that deviation can arise even with a very small fraction of transaction fees. Finally, we evaluate three protocol-level mechanisms: Base Fee, Fee Floor, and an adaptive maximum block size rule, and show that their combination raises the deviation threshold and mitigates incentive breakdown in a fee-only regime. These results provide a practical benchmark for assessing Bitcoin's security as block rewards disappear.
Transaction fee plays an important role in determining the priority of transaction processing in public blockchain systems. Owing to the observability of unconfirmed transactions, a strategic user can postpone his transaction broadcasting time and set a fee as low as possible by prying into his mempool that stores them. However, the stochastic mining interval may cause the delayed transaction to miss the next valid block. Meanwhile, a new feature (i.e. fee bumping) emerges that allows each user to increase his transaction fee before confirmation, making the fee setting more challenging. In this paper, we investigate a novel transaction policy from the perspective of a single strategic user that determines the broadcasting time and the transaction fee simultaneously. Two representative scenarios are considered, in which a number of coexisting ordinary users are mempool-oblivious that set their fees according to certain distribution, and are semi-strategic that check their mempools at a Poisson rate and update their fees. In the former, we compute the optimal broadcasting time and transaction fee that adapts to the arbitrary distribution of mining interval. When the block interval is exponentially distributed in Bitcoin-like PoW systems, the strategic user needs to broadcast his transaction immediately after its creation. And when the block interval is fixed in Ethereum-like PoS systems, he finds it profitable to wait until the last moment before block generation. In the latter, we formulate a continuous-time Markov chain to characterize the dynamics of mempool states, and derive the optimal fee adjusting frequency of the strategic user when the block interval is exponentially distributed. In both theory and simulations, we show that this strategic user should immediately increase his fee whenever it falls behind the minimum fee of being included.
Consider a social-choice function (SCF) is chosen to decide votes in a formal system, including votes to replace the voting method itself. Agents vote according to their ex-ante belief over what decisions are considered, and whether they prefer them to be decided by the incumbent SCF or the suggested replacement. The existing SCF then aggregates the agents' votes and arrives at a decision of whether it should itself be replaced. An SCF is self-maintaining if it can not be replaced in such fashion by any other SCF. Our focus is on the implications of self-maintenance for centralization. For this purpose, unlike [Barbera and Jackson, 2004], we do not generally restrict attention to anonymous SCFs. We also do not restrict attention to neutral SCFs, unlike [Koray, 2000]. We present results considering optimistic, pessimistic and i.i.d. approaches with respect to agent beliefs, different tie-breaking rules, and different SCF domains. To highlight two of the results, (i) for the i.i.d. unbiased case with arbitrary tie-breaking and general Boolean functions, we prove an Arrow-Style Theorem for Dynamics: We show that only a dictatorship is self-maintaining, and any other SCF has a path of changes that arrives at a dictatorship. (ii) With a pessimistic approach, tie-breaking that prefers the status quo, and WMGs, we provide a tight characterization of the self-maintaining rules, which are exactly all games with minimal winning coalitions of size at most 2. We then consider two extensions, (i) forward-looking voters, (ii) Where the voter utility depends on wisdom of the crowd effects. In both cases, less centralized SCFs become self-maintaining. All in all we provide a basic framework and body of results for centralization dynamics and stability, applicable for institution design, especially in formal De-Jure systems, such as Blockchain Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs).
Blockchains offer a decentralized and secure execution environment strong enough to host cryptocurrencies, but the state-replication model makes on-chain computation expensive. To avoid heavy on-chain workloads, systems like Truebit and optimistic rollups use challenge-based protocols, performing computations off-chain and invoking the chain only when challenged. This keeps normal-case costs low and, if at least one honest challenger exists, can catch fraud. What has been less clear is whether honest challengers are actually incentivized and a dishonest proposer is properly damaged under the worst case environment. We build a model with a colluding minority, heterogeneous costs, and three ordering modes. We then ask whether two goals can be met together: honest non-loss and fraud deterrence. Our results are clear: in single-winner designs, the incentive design is impossible or limited in scale. By contrast, in multi-winner designs, we obtain simple, explicit conditions under which both goals hold.
Luca Pennella, Pietro Saggese, Fabio Pinelli, Letterio Galletta
Decentralized Finance (DeFi) applications introduce novel financial instruments replicating and extending traditional ones through blockchain-based smart contracts. Among these applications, DeFi derivatives protocols enable the creation and trading of decentralized derivative instruments whose value depends on underlying cryptoassets, indices, or other reference variables. Despite their growing significance, however, they remain relatively understudied compared to other DeFi protocols, such as lending protocols and decentralized exchanges. This paper systematically analyzes DeFi derivatives protocols, categorized into perpetuals, options, and synthetics, with the aim of comparing their instrument structures, protocol mechanisms, operational dynamics, and economic agents. We provide a formal characterization of the main classes of decentralized derivative instruments and develop a protocol-agnostic framework that connects instrument-level specifications, market-state variables, and protocol-level mechanisms. We complement the analytical framework with numerical simulations that evaluate how derivative positions evolve under varying economic conditions, including changes in underlying asset prices, volatility, protocol-specific fees, and leverage. Overall, this study provides a structured analytical framework for understanding and comparing the design and functioning of decentralized finance derivatives protocols.
Diodato Ferraioli, Paolo Penna, Manvir Schneider, Carmine Ventre
A central challenge in blockchain tokenomics is aligning short-term performance incentives with long-term decentralization goals. We propose a framework for algorithmic monetary policies that navigates this tradeoff in repeated participation games. Agents, characterized by type (capability) and stake, choose to participate or abstain at each round; the policy (probabilistically) selects high-type agents for task execution (maximizing throughput) while distributing rewards to sustain decentralization. We analyze equilibria under two agent behaviors: myopic (short-term utility maximization) and foresighted (multi-round planning). For myopic agents, performance-centric policies risk centralization, but foresight enables stable decentralization with some volatility to the token value. We further discuss virtual stake--a hybrid of type and stake--as an alternative approach. We show that the initial virtual stake distribution critically impacts long-term outcomes, suggesting that policies must indirectly manage decentralization.
Michele Fabi, Viraj Nadkarni, Leonardo Leone, Matheus V. X. Ferreira
<div> We develop an axiomatic theory for Automated Market Makers (AMMs) in local energy sharing markets and analyze the Markov Perfect Equilibrium of the resulting economy with a Mean-Field Game. In this game, heterogeneous prosumers solve a Bellman equation to optimize energy consumption, storage, and exchanges. Our axioms identify a class of mechanisms with linear, Lipschitz continuous payment functions, where prices decrease with the aggregate supply-to-demand ratio of energy. We prove that implementing batch execution and concentrated liquidity allows standard design conditions from decentralized finance-quasi-concavity, monotonicity, and homotheticity-to construct AMMs that satisfy our axioms. The resulting AMMs are budget-balanced and achieve ex-ante efficiency, contrasting with the strategy-proof, expost optimal VCG mechanism. Since the AMM implements a Potential Game, we solve its equilibrium by first computing the social planner's optimum and then decentralizing the allocation. Numerical experiments using data from the Paris administrative region suggest that the prosumer community can achieve gains from trade up to 40% relative to the grid-only benchmark. </div>
With the rise of cryptocurrencies, many new applications built on decentralized blockchains have emerged. Blockchains are full-stack distributed systems where multiple sub-systems interact. While many deployed blockchains and decentralized applications need better scalability and performance, security is also critical. Due to their complexity, assessing blockchain and DAPP security requires a more holistic view than for traditional distributed or centralized systems. In this thesis, we summarize our contributions to blockchain and decentralized application security. We propose a security reference architecture to support standardized vulnerability and threat analysis. We study consensus security in single-chain Proof-of-Work blockchains, including resistance to selfish mining, undercutting, and greedy transaction selection, as well as related issues in DAG-based systems. We contribute to wallet security with a new classification of authentication schemes and a two-factor method based on One-Time Passwords. We advance e-voting with a practical boardroom voting protocol, extend it to a scalable version for millions of participants while preserving security and privacy, and introduce a repetitive voting framework that enables vote changes between elections while avoiding peak-end effects. Finally, we improve secure logging using blockchains and trusted computing through a centralized ledger that guarantees non-equivocation, integrity, and censorship evidence, then build on it to propose an interoperability protocol for central bank digital currencies that ensures atomic transfers.