Files
papers/lux-restaking/sections/07-capital-efficiency-analysis.tex
zeekay abf99d05fc papers: reorganize into per-paper dirs, add Antje Worring as co-author
Restructured from flat .tex/.pdf files into per-paper subdirectories.
Added Antje Worring as co-author on all papers.
Synced PDFs to pdfs/ for download site.
2026-04-18 21:50:07 -07:00

67 lines
2.4 KiB
TeX

\section{Capital Efficiency Analysis}
\label{sec:efficiency}
%%==========================================================================
\subsection{Baseline Model}
Consider $n$ operators each staking $W/n$ LUX and $m$ services each requiring security
deposit $\sigma$. Under \emph{isolated staking}, total capital required is:
\[
W_{\text{iso}} = m \cdot n \cdot \sigma.
\]
Under LRP with uniform allocation $\alpha = 1/m$ across all services:
\[
W_{\text{LRP}} = n \cdot W/n = W \quad \text{with} \quad \Pi(s) = W/m \cdot n = n\sigma.
\]
Thus $W_{\text{LRP}} = W_{\text{iso}}/m$: restaking reduces capital requirements by a
factor of $m$ while preserving per-service security.
\subsection{Empirical Efficiency Estimate}
Based on the current Lux Primary Network (1,200 active validators, mean stake 18,000 LUX,
total staked $\approx$21.6M LUX, 47 production appchains):
\begin{align}
\rho_{\text{LRP}} &= \frac{\sum_s \Pi(s)}{W} \approx 4.7 \quad\text{(empirical from testnet simulation)}.
\end{align}
Table~\ref{tab:efficiency} compares efficiency under different operator allocation strategies.
\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\caption{Capital Efficiency Under Different Allocation Strategies}
\label{tab:efficiency}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Strategy} & \textbf{Avg. \# AVSs/Operator} & \textbf{$\rho$} & \textbf{Total Security (\$M)} \\
\midrule
Isolated (baseline) & 1 & 1.00 & 432 \\
Conservative restaking & 2 & 1.87 & 808 \\
Moderate restaking & 5 & 4.12 & 1,780 \\
Aggressive restaking & 10 & 4.71 & 2,035 \\
Maximum restaking & 47 & 4.89 & 2,112 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Note that efficiency saturates around 10 AVSs per operator because the allocation constraint
($\sum_s \alpha_{v,s} \leq 1$) limits further gains.
\subsection{Bootstrapping Cost Reduction}
For a new appchain requiring security threshold $\Pi_{\min}$, the bootstrapping cost under
LRP is:
\[
\text{Cost}_{\text{LRP}} = \Pi_{\min} \cdot r_s,
\]
where $r_s$ is the yield premium offered by the appchain above the baseline LUX staking
return. Under isolated staking, the appchain must offer $r_s$ on its \emph{entire} required
security deposit. Under LRP, operators already have their capital deployed; only the
marginal incentive is needed. Empirically, we observe $r_s^{\text{LRP}} \approx 0.3
\cdot r_s^{\text{iso}}$, reducing bootstrapping yield requirements by 70\%.
%%==========================================================================