Centralization in Attester-Proposer Separation

Mallesh Pai; Max Resnick

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2408.03116

Centralization in Attester-Proposer Separation

Mallesh Pai·Max Resnick

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We show that Execution Tickets and Execution Auctions dramatically increase centralization in the market for block proposals, even without multi-block MEV concerns. Previous analyses have insufficiently or incorrectly modeled the interaction between ahead-of-time auctions and just-in-time (JIT) auctions. We study a model where bidders compete in an execution auction ahead of time, and then the winner holds a JIT auction to resell the proposal rights when the slot arrives. During the execution auction, bidders only know the distribution of their valuations. Bidders then draw values from their distributions and compete in the JIT auction. We show that a bidder who wins the execution auction is substantially advantaged in the JIT auction since they can set a reserve price higher than their own realized value for the slot to increase their revenue. As a result, there is a strong centralizing force in the execution auction, which allows the ex-ante strongest bidder to win the execution auction every time, and similarly gives them the strongest incentive to buy up all the tickets. Similar results trivially apply if the resale market is imperfect, since that only reinforces the advantages of the ex-ante strong buyer. To reiterate, these results do not require the bidders to employ multi-block MEV strategies, although if they did, it would likely amplify the centralizing effects.

Explore related subjects

econ.TH cs.GT

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Mallesh Pai, Max Resnick. 2024-08-06. Centralization in Attester-Proposer Separation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.03116

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Log-concave functions and transformations thereof

I summarize Bagnoli and Bergstrom (2005)'s review on log-concave functions, make several corrections, and augment the discussion with further results that can be useful in establishing monotone hazard rates. I also provide an application to monopoly pricing, where log-concavity of the demand curve implies strict concavity of the revenue function in quantity.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2026

Audit the Auditors: Commitment versus Professional Judgment

This paper provides a theoretical framework to evaluate the trade-off between the self-regulated peer review system and independent government inspection (PCAOB) in the auditing profession. We model the peer review system as a Judgment Regime, where a stakeholder utilizes professional expertise, captured as a private signal, to make ex-post decisions on verifying audit failures. In contrast, PCAOB inspection is modeled as a Commitment Regime, where the stakeholder lacks private information but can commit ex-ante to a predetermined level of verification. We find that the Judgment Regime benefits from a resource-allocation effect and a deterrence effect driven by informed verification, whereas the Commitment Regime deters audit failures through the first-mover advantage of ex-ante commitment. Our analysis demonstrates that the stakeholder prefers the peer review system if and only if the private signal is sufficiently informative. Furthermore, comparative statics reveal that higher verification costs or stronger audit incentives shift the stakeholder's preference toward PCAOB inspection.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2026

Reputation, Disclosure, and the Scope of Entry

This paper studies how learning about an incumbent affects the scope of entry when competitive responses use resources shared across markets. An entrant chooses whether to launch in neither, one, or both of two markets. Entry into the second market reduces the incumbent's cost-reducing response in the first and can make one-market entry unattractive. The entrant learns about the incumbent's capability from a record of its response to an earlier rival. More frequent publication encourages a less capable incumbent to imitate a more capable one. An observed response then becomes less informative, and entry after that record expands. We compare publication of conduct with a public audit of capability. For an open set of parameters with uniform setup costs, full publication maximizes total surplus within the specified policy class when publication costs are low. Removing the interaction between response costs across markets reverses this choice, while preserving all early and singleton-market payoffs. A capability audit is dominated in both economies. Expected entry scope is constant across the considered policies within each technology, although productive investment and the allocation of entry change.

econ.TH↗