{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2026:PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23","short_pith_number":"pith:PZANHXIO","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"7e40d3dd0e832cb963645ba4db7e31d6fc8fda9049bac86155e52f7ea4605ebc","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2606.21769","version":1},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Optimal Dynamic Fees for Automated Market Makers: A Stochastic Control Approach to Loss-Versus-Rebalancing","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["q-fin.TR"],"primary_cat":"q-fin.MF","authors_text":"Farbod Ghasemlu","submitted_at":"2026-06-19T21:34:27Z","abstract_excerpt":"We study the fee policy of a liquidity provider (LP) in a constant-product automated market maker (AMM) whose fee can be adjusted continuously, as enabled by programmable hooks. Building on the loss-versus-rebalancing (LVR) framework of Milionis et al. (2022) and its extension to nonzero fees by Milionis et al. (2024), we model the LP's wealth relative to the continuously rebalanced benchmark as a controlled process in which the fee governs two opposing forces: it raises revenue per uninformed trade while discouraging uninformed volume, and it widens the no-arbitrage band, which lowers the rat"},"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":"2606.21769","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"metadata":{"license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","primary_cat":"q-fin.MF","submitted_at":"2026-06-19T21:34:27Z","cross_cats_sorted":["q-fin.TR"],"title_canon_sha256":"99e59a8afd582e52a484b9e7c4aff09d2e3b73a92f62a29b4c342c39938ac396","abstract_canon_sha256":"fa1e78715dda5232e0802c4e4a642fa764e73cce888870963871e6feb3c5040e"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.946299Z","signature_b64":"sasDtXm8tFXzgdyffhhxOFLS2Bv7h69VZbMNT6cZ0MtsQYYJyEdvtNHbEcjJ4RH9c0g8coupJ9gGkVhAnMFmCA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"7e40d3dd0e832cb963645ba4db7e31d6fc8fda9049bac86155e52f7ea4605ebc","last_reissued_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945894Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945894Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Optimal Dynamic Fees for Automated Market Makers: A Stochastic Control Approach to Loss-Versus-Rebalancing","license":"http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["q-fin.TR"],"primary_cat":"q-fin.MF","authors_text":"Farbod Ghasemlu","submitted_at":"2026-06-19T21:34:27Z","abstract_excerpt":"We study the fee policy of a liquidity provider (LP) in a constant-product automated market maker (AMM) whose fee can be adjusted continuously, as enabled by programmable hooks. Building on the loss-versus-rebalancing (LVR) framework of Milionis et al. (2022) and its extension to nonzero fees by Milionis et al. (2024), we model the LP's wealth relative to the continuously rebalanced benchmark as a controlled process in which the fee governs two opposing forces: it raises revenue per uninformed trade while discouraging uninformed volume, and it widens the no-arbitrage band, which lowers the rat"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2606.21769","kind":"arxiv","version":1},"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/2606.21769/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":"2606.21769","created_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945972+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2606.21769v1","created_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945972+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2606.21769","created_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945972+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"PZANHXIOQMWL","created_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945972+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"PZANHXIOQMWLSY3E","created_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945972+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"PZANHXIO","created_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945972+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":1,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2607.08525","citing_title":"Causal Effects of Protocol-Fee Changes on Liquidity Provision in Automated Market Makers","ref_index":15,"is_internal_anchor":true}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23","json":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/PZANHXIO"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/PZANHXIO","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2606.21769&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/PZANHXIOQMWLSY3ELOSNW7RR23/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945972+00:00","updated_at":"2026-06-23T01:13:21.945972+00:00"}