Contents:
The network we consider has a fixed number of nodes N — corresponding to all Bitcoin users that may decide to switch to the LN — and is sparse , i. If we consider node i and j having fitness x i and x j respectively, a LN channel, i. In the context of the LN network, we define the fitness x i of node i as the simplest increasing function of both capacity and volume of transactions, i.
If we imagine links are added one at a time at a given rate, from the kernel f x , y we can derive the probability that a node with fitness x increases its degree by one as The same considerations apply to its counterpart j. It is therefore of paramount importance to understand under which conditions on the average wealth, average volume of transactions, and routing fees, this transition may happen, and what finite fraction of nodes will it involve.
Schematic representation of the emergence of the connected component among fit nodes, below left and above right the percolation threshold. Hence, we have. Simplifying we obtain. In this case, it follows from 6 and 9 that. Splitting the integration region, we get. Computing now the generating function The general theory see Appendix B, in particular Eq. The average size of the giant component thus reads from Eq. The fitness distribution now becomes.
As in the uniform-wealth case. Increasing the average wealth w 0 would push the curves upwards: as more liquidity becomes available across nodes, more and more players may get involved in the LN for the same level of routing fees.
Simulations with kernel f x , y in Eq. To find the size of the largest connected component, we use a breadth-first search algorithm 54 : starting from a source node s , we label it as belonging to cluster 1. We then explore its neighborhood and assign all nodes reachable from s to cluster 1 as well. The algorithm proceeds recursively until either the whole network has been labelled, or no unlabelled nodes can be further reached. In the latter case, we select another random source among the unlabelled nodes, assign it the label 2, and restart the procedure to find another cluster.
At the end, all disjoint clusters have been identified, and their size recorded. In our plots, we monitor the size of the largest cluster. The sharp transition between the two regimes i. As a matter of fact, different platforms are currently being offered — but only at a test stage — where users can experience the Lighting Network services in a simulated environment. The function f x , y in Eq. Similarly, the model is fairly insensitive to the details of the full probability distribution of wealth that is used see however 23 for a data-driven analysis of Bitcoin wealth distribution , while being flexible enough to generate a desired degree distribution P k via a different choice of the attachment kernel f x , y The transition is elucidated analytically and numerically, with excellent agreement.
A mechanism for the dynamical update of wealth as more channels are opened and funds are locked may be introduced to investigate the liquidity constraints of the network in more detail. Dynamically generated wealth inequalities and concentration may be detected by means of centrality measures.
The resilience of the network can be studied under different types of attacks and compared with available empirical results 7 , Different choices of the kernel f x , y e. This could lead to networks with heterogeneous heavy-tailed degree distribution, which seems to be in line with recent empirical studies 7. Once the development of the Lightning Network technology and implementation will have reached maturity, it will be possible to gather data to calibrate our model, which can serve as a driver for policy changes and as guidance for incentive mechanisms design.
Multiplying both sides of Eq. For large M , Eq. Marginalizing with respect to x , we eventually obtain the probability that a node has degree k irrespective of its fitness as. We introduce the generating function G 1 s of the normalized probability that by following a randomly chosen edge we reach a node with degree k.
Moreover, we indicate with H 0 x the generating function of the probability that a randomly chosen node belongs to a connected component of size t. More precisely Eq. Assuming that the typical component sizes are finite and that the chances of a component containing a closed loop of edges are negligible for sufficiently large N , the distribution of components generated by H 1 x can be obtained as follows 47 , 51 , Marginalizing over the degree distribution, we obtain the probability Q t that a randomly chosen node belongs to a component of size t as.
Computing H 0 x from Summarizing, the two equations to be solved together are. Substituting 49 in 47 yields. When the giant component has formed, H 0 x and H 1 x see Eq. Assuming that there is only one such giant component, Eq. Therefore from 43 and Nakamoto, S. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Croman, K. On scaling decentralized blockchains. Gudgeon, L. Sok: Off the chain transactions. Google Scholar. Mingxiao, D. A review on consensus algorithm of blockchain. Franco, P. Understanding Bitcoin Wiley Online Library, Poon, J. Seres, I. Barrat, A. Dynamical processes on complex networks Cambridge University Press, Albert, R.
Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature , Cohen, R. Resilience of the Internet to random breakdowns. Rohrer, E. How to charge lightning. A cryptoeconomic traffic analysis of Bitcoins lightning network.
No information is available for this page. Indeed, this economics literature received attention from early Bitcoin industry participants, and scholars also observed that Bitcoin (as a purely digital.
Antonopoulos, A. Orcutt, M. How secure is blockchain really. MIT Technology Review Easley, D. From mining to markets: The evolution of Bitcoin transaction fees. Financial Econ. Article Google Scholar. Houy, N. The economics of Bitcoin transaction fees. Decker, C. Information propagation in the Bitcoin network. Pappalardo, G. Blockchain inefficiency in the Bitcoin peers network. EPJ Data Science 7 , 30 Bovet, A. Network-based indicators of Bitcoin bubbles. The evolving liaisons between the transaction networks of Bitcoin and its price dynamics. Lischke, M. Analyzing the Bitcoin network: The first four years.
Internet 8 , 7 Kondor, D. Do the rich get richer? Plos One 9 , e Ciaian, P. The economics of Bitcoin price formation. Cong, L. Tokenomics: Dynamic adoption and valuation. Columbia Business School Research Paper Bartolucci, S. A model of the optimal selection of crypto assets. Alessandretti, L. Anticipating cryptocurrency prices using machine learning. Complexity Article ID Bitcoin market route to maturity? Evidence from return fluctuations, temporal correlations and multiscaling effects. Chaos: An Interdiscip.
Nonlinear Sci. Signatures of crypto-currency market decoupling from the forex. Sigaki, H. Clustering patterns in efficiency and the coming-of-age of the cryptocurrency market. Urquhart, A. The inefficiency of Bitcoin. Machine learning the cryptocurrency market. Available at SSRN ElBahrawy, A. Evolutionary dynamics of the cryptocurrency market. Royal Soc. Open Sci. Cocco, L. Using an artificial financial market for studying a cryptocurrency market. Aste, T. Cryptocurrency market structure: connecting emotions and economics.
Finance 1 , 5—21 Abraham, J. Cryptocurrency price prediction using tweet volumes and sentiment analysis. SMU Data Sci. Kim, Y. Predicting fluctuations in cryptocurrency transactions based on user comments and replies. Li, T. Sentiment-based prediction of alternative cryptocurrency price fluctuations using gradient boosting tree model.
Kristoufek, L. Bitcoin meets Google trends and Wikipedia: Quantifying the relationship between phenomena of the Internet era. Garcia, D. The digital traces of bubbles: feedback cycles between socio-economic signals in the Bitcoin economy. Interface 11 , Chen, C.
Sentiment-induced bubbles in the cryptocurrency market. Risk Financial Manag. Yelowitz, A. Characteristics of Bitcoin users: an analysis of Google search data. Lin, J. Rohrer, E. How to charge lightning.
Finite-time stability of impulsive differential inclusion: Applications to discontinuous impulsive neural networks. All the predictive models used in this paper are actually a modification of autoregressive model AR. To sum up, the predictive models combined with investor attention can indeed apply to forecast the Bitcoin return both in linear and non-linear model specifications. Tschorsch and B. Detailed results are shown in Table The VAR model is a linear predictive model, which allows the variables to be forecasted by past values. International Journal of Forecasting.
A cryptoeconomic traffic analysis of Bitcoins lightning network. Antonopoulos, A. Orcutt, M. How secure is blockchain really.
MIT Technology Review Easley, D. From mining to markets: The evolution of Bitcoin transaction fees. Financial Econ. Article Google Scholar. Houy, N. The economics of Bitcoin transaction fees. Decker, C. Information propagation in the Bitcoin network. Pappalardo, G. Blockchain inefficiency in the Bitcoin peers network.