arXiv preprint ·

ETH-TraceBench: A Large-Scale Event-Stream Benchmark for Ethereum DeFi under Temporal, Protocol, and Contract Shift

Kemal Kirtac and Carsten Maple

Published
Source
arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
Original
Read it at arXiv
Topics
Machine Learning

Abstract

Ethereum decentralized finance (DeFi) provides a public, time-stamped record of transaction-level event streams, but the same public symbols can create strong machine-learning shortcuts. We introduce ETH-TraceBench, a benchmark for evaluating Ethereum DeFi representations under temporal, protocol, pool/infrastructure, and symbolic shift. The raw event universe covers January 2021-December 2025 and contains 1.35 billion transactions with logs and 5.01 billion raw log rows. Model evaluation uses a fixed 911,267-instance supervised sample, training on 2021-2024, selecting models on 2025H1, and testing on 2025H2. Simple models perform strongly on the aggregate temporal test: TraceStats-GB reaches 0.953 macro-F1 and TopicEmitterHashMLP 0.959 on the canonical DEX test set. Performance drops sharply under protocol novelty, with macro-F1 of 0.794, 0.743, and 0.766 for TraceStats-GB, TopicEmitterTrace-SGD, and TopicEmitterHashMLP, while strict unseen-pool scores remain 0.927, 0.897, and 0.935. Uniswap v4 and Ekubo v1, both absent from supervised training, are materially harder than the full test. Jointly masking emitter and topic identity reduces DEX macro-F1 to 0.916 and liquidation macro-F1 to 0.774 for TopicEmitterTrace-SGD. A standard Transformer over log-index-ordered events provides no consistent advantage over a deterministic shuffle of the same events, indicating that high aggregate scores can arise without sophisticated chronological modeling. A natural-prevalence audit estimates 2025H2 DEX prevalence among logged Ethereum transactions at about 22.5%, and a deterministic 400-transaction audit finds complete agreement with task label sources and independently re-queried raw-log counts. ETH-TraceBench therefore treats difficult transfer and controlled-input conditions, rather than a single aggregate score, as the main evaluation target.

The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.

Read it on ReadSearch

Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.

Already a reader? Sign in

All new papers in Machine Learning

Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.

ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.

Papers belong to their authors and publishers; every page here links to the original. All research topics