Economic determinants of Ethereum transaction fees in the priority fee and proof of stake periods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analyse the economic determinants and dynamics of transaction fees in the Ethereum blockchain before and after two significant platform updates. The first is the August 2021 EIP-1559 ‘London’ upgrade, a switch from user-bid gas price (transaction fee per unit of complexity) to a fee model in which the gas price is the sum of an algorithmically determined base fee and an optional priority fee (tip) chosen by the user. The second update (‘the Merge’) is the switch from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake transactions validation in September 2022. We estimate the impact on Ethereum transaction fees of both demand factors (block utilization, transaction type, ETH price in USD) and algorithmic supply-side factors (the block gas limit and base fee). Using data from nearly 900 million blockchain transactions, we find that the gas price is statistically significantly positively associated with the block utilization rate. A larger share of contract call transactions or legacy (user-bid gas price) transactions is linked with higher gas prices on average. On the supply side, a higher block gas limit is statistically significantly associated with lower gas prices.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".