{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2025:EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB","short_pith_number":"pith:EWZZWY3A","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"25b39b6360feab3db5afd3c38cadfa5068a6ef1a03c08ef315431cf7f80bcc47","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2506.02869","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Optimal Dynamic Fees in Automated Market Makers","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["q-fin.MF"],"primary_cat":"q-fin.TR","authors_text":"Leandro S\\'anchez-Betancourt, Leonardo Baggiani, Martin Herdegen","submitted_at":"2025-06-03T13:34:28Z","abstract_excerpt":"Automated Market Makers (AMMs) are emerging as a popular decentralised trading platform. In this work, we determine the optimal dynamic fees in a constant function market maker. We find approximate closed-form solutions to the control problem and study the optimal fee structure. We find that there are two distinct fee regimes: one in which the AMM imposes higher fees to deter arbitrageurs, and another where fees are lowered to increase volatility and attract noise traders. Our results also show that dynamic fees that are linear in inventory and are sensitive to changes in the external price ar"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2506.02869","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"q-fin.TR","submitted_at":"2025-06-03T13:34:28Z","cross_cats_sorted":["q-fin.MF"],"title_canon_sha256":"4e7dce88bbe09f0efa99589025ae1bbad32873ee465d35739750690cf105290c","abstract_canon_sha256":"67da41f03330397aade80cc634ce07c287427cb424801800d95d4bf4858d7740"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.229114Z","signature_b64":"L3ew47a0U9ePac2DP47WQTAfUfDKroI2aBsFBmQbRrveVEkK7A8V6cw+8KL11bpb/OEQUxbiU1BwHMPmVtdPBA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"25b39b6360feab3db5afd3c38cadfa5068a6ef1a03c08ef315431cf7f80bcc47","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228626Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228626Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Optimal Dynamic Fees in Automated Market Makers","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["q-fin.MF"],"primary_cat":"q-fin.TR","authors_text":"Leandro S\\'anchez-Betancourt, Leonardo Baggiani, Martin Herdegen","submitted_at":"2025-06-03T13:34:28Z","abstract_excerpt":"Automated Market Makers (AMMs) are emerging as a popular decentralised trading platform. In this work, we determine the optimal dynamic fees in a constant function market maker. We find approximate closed-form solutions to the control problem and study the optimal fee structure. We find that there are two distinct fee regimes: one in which the AMM imposes higher fees to deter arbitrageurs, and another where fees are lowered to increase volatility and attract noise traders. Our results also show that dynamic fees that are linear in inventory and are sensitive to changes in the external price ar"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2506.02869","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2506.02869/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2506.02869","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228686+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2506.02869v2","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228686+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2506.02869","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228686+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"EWZZWY3A72VT","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228686+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228686+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"EWZZWY3A","created_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228686+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":3,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.21769","citing_title":"Optimal Dynamic Fees for Automated Market Makers: A Stochastic Control Approach to Loss-Versus-Rebalancing","ref_index":7,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2604.28017","citing_title":"Characterizing Path-Independent Fees: A Route to Zero Impermanent Loss in CPMMs","ref_index":25,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2604.28014","citing_title":"From Impermanent Loss to Sustainable Gain: Quantifying Profitability Zones for Liquidity Providers on DEX","ref_index":13,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB","json":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/EWZZWY3A"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/EWZZWY3A","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2506.02869&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/EWZZWY3A72VT3NNP2PBYZLP2KB/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228686+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T11:26:52.228686+00:00"}