Blockchain Meets Securities: A Scalable Tokenization Framework
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a securities tokenization solution that brings the accessibility, transparency, efficiency, and innovation of blockchain and decentralized finance to real-world securities. Tokenization in principle seems straightforward—an intermediary holds assets and issues 1:1 tokens—but decentralized finance applications (DeFi) introduce significant complications. Even basic DeFi mechanisms, such as liquidity pools, pose challenges for tokenizing stocks and bonds because when assets are pooled in smart contracts, ownership becomes unclear, hindering asset owners to access their entitlements, such as dividends, coupons, or voting rights. Existing solutions often fail to address these challenges and are typically limited to specific security types. Our solution, by contrast, generalizes to any security and any holding rights through fungible tokens and using separate smart contracts for shareholders to redeem their entitlements. To address the decentralized ownership issue, our solution employs off-chain accounting with additional logic for liquidity pools. We implement this on Ethereum, demonstrating that it is 27% cheaper in gas costs than current alternatives. We also analyze the liquidity logic of over 90% of Ethereum's liquidity pools, confirming compatibility with our solution. Finally, we demonstrate its use for dividend-paying stocks, common stock, mergers, and coupon-paying bonds.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it