The blockchain-based Automated Market Maker (AMM) mechanism establishes a multilateral trading market for multi-source homogeneous data assets. Its advantage lies in realizing algorithmic dynamic pricing and automated circulation through decentralized liquidity pools, effectively avoiding the single-point failure issues and pricing inefficiencies associated with traditional centralized platforms, while significantly improving the trading efficiency and value conversion potential of data assets. However, in high-frequency, large-scale, multilateral data trading scenarios, these AMM liquidity pools face intensified Impermanent Loss (IL) that cannot be easily addressed by conventional risk mitigation approaches, necessitating domain-specific tailored solutions. To address this issue, our study proposes a blockchain on-chain liquidity pool-based data trading market model. Through mathematical modeling and simulation experiments, we quantify how trader behavioral characteristics, including price sensitivity differentials, heterogeneous trading frequencies, and trading size variations, impact the value of AMM liquidity pool. On this basis, we propose a Behavior-Aware Real-time Trading-driven Impermanent Loss optimization method (BART-IL), which uses multi-factor scoring to dynamically sequence trades, generating low-impermanent-loss execution paths to mitigate risks for Liquidity Providers (LPs). Experimental results demonstrate that BART-IL reduces IL for LPs, capping maximum loss at 25.6% in large-scale trading scenarios and achieving over 40% loss reduction in high-frequency-dominant markets. Accordingly, the method substantially lowers the overall risk of data trading. This research addresses the adaptability bottleneck of AMM mechanisms for non-standard assets. By integrating innovations in mechanism design and algorithm optimization, we construct a low-cost blockchain-based decentralized data trading framework with enhanced fairness, offering important implications for ensuring the robustness and attractiveness of data trading platforms.
Si et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: