All public blockchains are secured by a proof of opportunity cost among block producers. For example, the security offered by proof-of-work (PoW) systems, like Bitcoin, is due to spent computation; it is work precisely because it cannot be performed for free. In general, more resources provably lost in producing blocks yields more security for the blockchain. When two blockchains share the same mechanism for providing opportunity cost, as is the case when they share the same PoW algorithm, the two chains compete for resources from block producers. Indeed, if there exists a liquid market between resource types, then theoretically all blockchains will compete for resources. In this paper, we show that there exists a resource allocation equilibrium between any two blockchains, which is essentially driven by the fiat value of reward that each chain offers in return for providing security. We go on to prove that this equilibrium is singular and always achieved provided that block producers behave in a greedy, but cautious fashion. The opposite is true when they are overly greedy: resource allocation oscillates in extremes between the two chains. We show that these results hold both in practice and in a block generation simulation. Finally, we demonstrate several applications of this theory including a trustless price-ratio oracle, increased security for blockchains whose coins have lower fiat value, and a quantification of cost to allocating resources away from the equilibrium.
Also closely related is the work of @cite_6 who apply the theory of Potential Games @cite_23 to the problem of miner hash rate allocation across multiple blockchains. They prove that, regardless of individual hash rate and coinbase rewards for each of the blockchains, hash rate allocation will converge to a pure equilibrium provided that miners follow . The model assumes minimal rationality on behalf of the players, i.e., that they follow an arbitrary better response step improving their individual payoffs.'' @cite_6 do not identify a specific equilibrium point, nor do they specify what the should be. But their work anticipates some of the theoretical results we present in . Furthermore, they show that the equilibrium point can be changed by changing a blockchain's coinbase reward, a property that is emergent from the properties of the equilibrium and one that we exploit to increase security in . @cite_16 reached similar conclusions as @cite_6 using a slightly different game theoretical model of hash rate allocation across cryptocurrencies and mining pools.
@cite_16 @cite_23 @cite_6
2809512071 2911474632 2556732087 1517645949
Abrupt changes in the miner hash rate applied to a proof-of-work (PoW) blockchain can adversely affect user experience and security. Because different PoW blockchains often share hashing algorithms, miners face a complex choice in deciding how to allocate their hash power among chains. We present an economic model that leverages Modern Portfolio Theory to predict a miner’s allocation over time using price data and inferred risk tolerance. The model matches actual allocations with mean absolute error within 20 for four out of the top five miners active on both Bitcoin (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) blockchains. A model of aggregate allocation across those four miners shows excellent agreement in magnitude with the actual aggregate as well a correlation coefficient of 0.649. The accuracy of the aggregate allocation model is also sufficient to explain major historical changes in inter-block time (IBT) for BCH. Because estimates of miner risk are not time-dependent and our model is otherwise price-driven, we are able to use it to anticipate the effect of a major price shock on hash allocation and IBT in the BCH blockchain. Using a Monte Carlo simulation, we show that, despite mitigation by the new difficulty adjustment algorithm, a price drop of 50 could increase the IBT by 50 for at least a day, with a peak delay of 100 . We model the competition over several blockchains characterizing multiple cryptocurrencies as a non-cooperative game. Then, we specialize our results to two instances of the general game, showing properties of the Nash equilibrium. In particular, leveraging results about congestion games, we establish the existence of pure Nash equilibria and provide efficient algorithms for finding such equilibria. We study a setting where a set of players simultaneously invest in a shared resource. The resource has a probability of failure and a return on investment, both of which are functions of the total investment by all players. We use a simple reference dependent preference model to capture players with heterogeneous risk attitudes (risk seeking, risk neutral and risk averse). We show the existence and uniqueness of a pure strategy Nash equilibrium in this setting and examine the effect of different risk attitudes on players' strategies in the presence of uncertainty. In particular, we show that at the equilibrium, risk averse players are pushed out of the resource by risk seeking players. We compare the failure probabilities in the decentralized (game-theoretic) and centralized settings, and show that our proposed game belongs to the class of best response potential games, for which there are simple dynamics that allow all players to converge to the equilibrium. We study the outcome of natural learning algorithms in atomic congestion games. Atomic congestion games have a wide variety of equilibria often with vastly differing social costs. We show that in almost all such games, the well- known multiplicative-weights learning algorithm results in convergence to pure equilibria. Our results show that nat- ural learning behavior can avoid bad outcomes predicted by the price of anarchy in atomic congestion games such as the load-balancing game introduced by Koutsoupias and Pa- padimitriou, which has super-constant price of anarchy and has correlated equilibria that are exponentially worse than any mixed Nash equilibrium. Our results identify a set of mixed Nash equilibria that we call weakly stable equilibria. Our notion of weakly stable is defined game-theoretically, but we show that this property holds whenever a stability criterion from the theory of dy- namical systems is satisfied. This allows us to show that in every congestion game, the distribution of play converges to the set of weakly stable equilibria. Pure Nash equilibria are weakly stable, and we show using techniques from algebraic geometry that the converse is true with probability 1 when congestion costs are selected at random independently on each edge (from any monotonically parametrized distribu- tion). We further extend our results to show that players can use algorithms with different (sufficiently small) learn- ing rates, i.e. they can trade off convergence speed and long term average regret differently.