MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401814899 · doi:10.1145/3689631

Exposing Stealthy Wash Trading on Automated Market Maker Exchanges

2024· article· en· W4401814899 on OpenAlexafffund
Rundong Gan, Le Wang, Liang Xue, Xiaodong Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Internet Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer securityWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decentralized Finance (DeFi), a pivotal component of the emerging Web3 landscape, is gaining popularity but remains vulnerable to market manipulations, such as wash trading. Wash trading is an illegal practice, where traders buy and sell assets to themselves within cryptocurrency exchanges to artificially inflate trading volumes and distort market perceptions. However, current research primarily focuses on traditional exchanges based on the Order-book mechanism (similar to stock markets), while ignoring the Automated Market Maker (AMM) exchanges, which dominate over 75% of the market and represent a significant innovation within the DeFi. This study utilizes entity recognition technology to detect wash trading on AMM exchanges within Ethereum-like systems, based on the understanding that colluding addresses (perceived as the same entity) must use ETH for transaction fees and exhibit direct or indirect ETH transfer links. We identify wash trading when addresses with transfer connections almost simultaneously buy and sell assets while their total asset holdings remain nearly constant. This comprehensive blockchain network analysis, compared to focusing solely on transactions within exchanges, unveils covert wash trading activities. Our detection method achieves a 95.9% recall and a 96.7% true negative rate in identifying pools affected by wash trading, demonstrating its superiority over existing methods. Furthermore, we apply our method to 98,945 pools from Uniswap V2 & V3 (the most popular AMM exchanges on Ethereum) and identify 1,070,626 abnormal transactions, totaling $27.51 billion in trading volume. Analysis of these transactions uncovers insights into wash traders’ behaviors, including the utilization of multiple addresses and the dual roles of certain addresses as wash traders and liquidity providers. These insights are crucial for developing more effective strategies to combat fraudulent activities in the DeFi ecosystem and enhance financial scrutiny.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Internet TechnologySame topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207