🤖 AI Summary
This paper addresses transaction fee mechanism design for leaderless blockchains with multiple collaborative block producers. We introduce the novel property of *strongly block-producer incentive compatibility* (strongly BPIC) and propose the first *first-price auction with equal sharing* (FPA-EQ) mechanism. FPA-EQ achieves a Pareto-optimal Nash equilibrium under multi-agent strategic interaction, strictly satisfies strongly BPIC, and guarantees that the equilibrium expected social welfare is at least 63.2% of the optimal welfare. We prove that, under the strongly BPIC constraint, dominant-strategy incentive compatibility (DSIC) and welfare optimality are fundamentally incompatible—thereby characterizing the precise trade-off between incentive compatibility and efficiency. To our knowledge, this work provides the first transaction fee mechanism for multi-proposer consensus protocols that simultaneously satisfies rigorous theoretical guarantees and practical feasibility.
📝 Abstract
We initiate the study of transaction fee mechanism design for blockchain protocols in which multiple block producers contribute to the production of each block. Our contributions include: - We propose an extensive-form (multi-stage) game model to reason about the game theory of multi-proposer transaction fee mechanisms. - We define the strongly BPIC property to capture the idea that all block producers should be motivated to behave as intended: for every user bid profile, following the intended allocation rule is a Nash equilibrium for block producers that Pareto dominates all other Nash equilibria. - We propose the first-price auction with equal sharing (FPA-EQ) mechanism as an attractive solution to the multi-proposer transaction fee mechanism design problem. We prove that the mechanism is strongly BPIC and guarantees at least a 63.2% fraction of the maximum-possible expected welfare at equilibrium. - We prove that the compromises made by the FPA-EQ mechanism are qualitatively necessary: no strongly BPIC mechanism with non-trivial welfare guarantees can be DSIC, and no strongly BPIC mechanism can guarantee optimal welfare at equilibrium.