A. Mamageishvili, Mahimna Kelkar, Jan Christoph Schlegel, E. Felten
{"title":"购买时间:时延竞赛与交易订购竞价","authors":"A. Mamageishvili, Mahimna Kelkar, Jan Christoph Schlegel, E. Felten","doi":"10.4230/LIPIcs.AFT.2023.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We design TimeBoost: a practical transaction ordering policy for rollup sequencers that takes into account both transaction timestamps and bids; it works by creating a score from timestamps and bids, and orders transactions based on this score. TimeBoost is transaction-data-independent (i.e., can work with encrypted transactions) and supports low transaction finalization times similar to a first-come first-serve (FCFS or pure-latency) ordering policy. At the same time, it avoids the inefficient latency competition created by an FCFS policy. It further satisfies useful economic properties of first-price auctions that come with a pure-bidding policy. We show through rigorous economic analyses how TimeBoost allows players to compete on arbitrage opportunities in a way that results in better guarantees compared to both pure-latency and pure-bidding approaches.","PeriodicalId":393632,"journal":{"name":"Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies","volume":"42 1","pages":"23:1-23:22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Buying Time: Latency Racing vs. Bidding for Transaction Ordering\",\"authors\":\"A. Mamageishvili, Mahimna Kelkar, Jan Christoph Schlegel, E. Felten\",\"doi\":\"10.4230/LIPIcs.AFT.2023.23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We design TimeBoost: a practical transaction ordering policy for rollup sequencers that takes into account both transaction timestamps and bids; it works by creating a score from timestamps and bids, and orders transactions based on this score. TimeBoost is transaction-data-independent (i.e., can work with encrypted transactions) and supports low transaction finalization times similar to a first-come first-serve (FCFS or pure-latency) ordering policy. At the same time, it avoids the inefficient latency competition created by an FCFS policy. It further satisfies useful economic properties of first-price auctions that come with a pure-bidding policy. We show through rigorous economic analyses how TimeBoost allows players to compete on arbitrage opportunities in a way that results in better guarantees compared to both pure-latency and pure-bidding approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":393632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"23:1-23:22\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.AFT.2023.23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.AFT.2023.23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Buying Time: Latency Racing vs. Bidding for Transaction Ordering
We design TimeBoost: a practical transaction ordering policy for rollup sequencers that takes into account both transaction timestamps and bids; it works by creating a score from timestamps and bids, and orders transactions based on this score. TimeBoost is transaction-data-independent (i.e., can work with encrypted transactions) and supports low transaction finalization times similar to a first-come first-serve (FCFS or pure-latency) ordering policy. At the same time, it avoids the inefficient latency competition created by an FCFS policy. It further satisfies useful economic properties of first-price auctions that come with a pure-bidding policy. We show through rigorous economic analyses how TimeBoost allows players to compete on arbitrage opportunities in a way that results in better guarantees compared to both pure-latency and pure-bidding approaches.