Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patterns of User Behavior and Token Adoption on ERC20

  • Original Research
  • Published:
SN Computer Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain-based technologies are disrupting markets across the globe. While the potential development of such technologies remains unclear, there is a current need to understand emergent patterns of user behavior and token adoption in order to design future products and cryptocurrencies. In this paper, we analyze the social dynamics taking place on the Ethereum platform ERC20 during their daily operations. We study two months of transactions among users on ERC20 using network theory. We analyze structural properties of networks that emerge as users exchange digital tokens. Network science provides a framework to analyze the behavior of social groups, with emphasis on their interactions. We characterize user behaviors based on their network connectivity, portfolio diversity and patterns of token adoption. Our results show that while most users are specialized and transact with a few tokens, a few of them transact with diverse portfolios, bridging and interconnecting large parts of the network. We believe this work to be a foundation for unveiling the usage dynamics of cryptocurrencies networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

One example of the ERC20 transaction network used in this manuscript will be fully available upon publication.

Notes

  1. https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/standards/tokens/erc-20/.

References

  1. Nakamoto S “Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system,” Decentralized business review 2008;

  2. Swan M. Blockchain: Blueprint for a New Economy. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2015; 1st ed.,

  3. Mulligan C, Scott JZ, Warren S, Rangaswami J. Blockchain beyond the hype a practical framework for business leaders. WEF: White Paper; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Pentland AS. Honest Signals: How They Shape Our World. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2008.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Krafft PM, Zheng J, Pan W, Penna ND, Altshuler ESY, Tenenbaum JB, Pentland A. “Human collective intelligence as distributed bayesian inference,” arXiv, 2016; vol. 1608.01987

  6. Liu Y, Nacher JC, Ochiai T, Martino M, Altshuler Y. “Prospect theory for online financial trading,” PLOS ONE, 2014; vol. 9, pp. 1–7, 10.

  7. Pan W, Altshuler Y, Pentland A. “Decoding social influence and the wisdom of the crowd in financial trading network,” in 2012 International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2012 International Confernece on Social Computing, Sep. 2012; pp. 203–209

  8. Slob A, Verbeek P-P. User Behavior and Technology Development: Shaping Sustainable Relations Between Consumers and Technoly. Netherlands: Springer; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bar-Yam Y. Complexity rising : from human beings to human civilization, a complexity profile. Oxford: UK), EOLSS Publishers; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ashby WR. Requisite Variety and Its Implications for the Control of Complex Systems, 1991; pp. 405–417. Boston, MA: Springer US.

  11. Zargham M, Zhang Z, Preciado VM. “A state-space modeling framework for engineering blockchain-enabled economic systems,” CoRR, 2018; vol. abs/1807.00955.

  12. Battiston F, Nicosia V, Latora V. Structural measures for multiplex networks. Phys Rev E. 2014;89: 032804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zheng Z, Xie S, Dai H, Chen X, Wang H. “An overview of blockchain technology: Architecture, consensus, and future trends,” in 2017 IEEE International Congress on Big Data (BigData Congress), June 2017; pp. 557–564.

  14. Eyal I, Sirer EG. Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. Commun ACM. 2018;61:95–102.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Rahulamathavan Y, Phan RC-W, Rajarajan M, Misra S, Kondoz A. “Privacy-preserving blockchain based iot ecosystem using attribute-based encryption,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Networks and Telecommunications Systems (ANTS), 2017; pp. 1–6, IEEE.

  16. Eyal I, Gencer AE, Sirer EG, Van Renesse R. “Bitcoin-ng: A scalable blockchain protocol,” in 13th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation ( NSDI 16), 2016; pp. 45–59,

  17. Somin S, Gordon G, Altshuler Y. “Network analysis of ERC20 tokens trading on Ethereum blockchain,” in Unifying Themes in Complex Systems IX, (Cham), 2018; pp. 439–450, Springer.

  18. Maesa DDF, Marino A, Ricci L. “Uncovering the bitcoin blockchain: An analysis of the full users graph,” in 2016 IEEE International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA), Oct 2016; pp. 537–546

  19. Lischke M, Fabian B. “Analyzing the bitcoin network: The first four years,” Future Internet, 2016; vol. 8, no. 1,

  20. Clack CD, Bakshi VA, Braine L. “Smart contract templates: foundations, design landscape and research directions,” 2016; arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.00771.

  21. Catalini C, Gans JS “Initial coin offerings and the value of crypto tokens,” National Bureau of Economic Research; 2018.

  22. Yoder JD, Adams J, Prince HT. “The price of a token,” JPMS: Journal of Political and Military Sociology, 1983; vol. 11, no. 2, p. 325.

  23. Cong LW, Li Y, Wang N. Tokenomics: Dynamic adoption and valuation. The Review of Financial Studies. 2021;34(3):1105–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bartoletti M, Pompianu L. “An empirical analysis of smart contracts: plat- forms, applications, and design patterns,” International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security; 2017.

  25. Anderson L, Holz APR, Rimba P, Weber I. “New kids on the block: an analysis of modern blockchains,” arXiv, 2016; vol. 1606.06530.

  26. Christidis, K, Devetsikiotis M. “Blockchains and smart contracts for the internet of things,” IEEE Access, 2016;vol. 4.

  27. Chen Y. Blockchain tokens and the potential democratization of entrepreneurship and innovation. Bus Horiz. 2018;61(4):567–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Böhme R, Christin N, Edelman B, Moore T. Bitcoin: Economics, technology, and governance. Journal of economic Perspectives. 2015;29(2):213–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ciaian P, Rajcaniova M, Kancs d’Artis, “The economics of bitcoin price formation,” Applied Economics, 2016;vol. 48, no. 19, pp. 1799–1815.

  30. Urquhart A. The inefficiency of bitcoin. Econ Lett. 2016;148:80–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Nicholas Taleb N. “Bitcoin, currencies, and fragility,” Quantitative Finance, 2021;vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1249–1255 .

  32. Chen W, Zhang T, Chen Z, Zheng Z, Lu Y. Traveling the token world: A graph analysis of ethereum erc20 token ecosystem. Proceedings of The Web Conference. 2020;2020:1411–21.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Somin S, Gordon G, Pentland A, Altshuler Y. “Dynamic equilibration of erc20 network,” CODE Conference;2018.

  34. Shmueli E, Altshuler Y, Pentland A. “Temporal dynamics of scale-free networks,” in Social Computing, Behavioral-Cultural Modeling and Prediction, (Cham), 2014;pp. 359–366, Springer International Publishing.

  35. Somin S, Gordon G, Pentland A, Shmueli E, Altshuler Y. “Erc20 transactions over ethereum blockchain: Network analysis and predictions,”; 2020.

  36. Barabási A-L. Network science. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. 2013;371(1987):20120375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Manoj B, Chakraborty A, Singh R. Complex networks: A networking and signal processing perspective. Prentice Hall; 2018.

  38. Morales AJ, Borondo J, Losada JC, Benito RM. Efficiency of human activity on information spreading on twitter. Social networks. 2014;39:1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Dong X, Suhara Y, Bozkaya B, Singh VK, Lepri B, Pentland A. Social bridges in urban purchase behavior. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST). 2017;9(3):1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Newman ME, Park J. Why social networks are different from other types of networks. Phys Rev E. 2003;68(3): 036122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Dijkstra EW. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numer Math. 1959;1(1):269–71.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. McLeod S. “The milgram experiment,” Simply Psychology; 2007.

  43. Myers SA, Sharma A, Gupta P, Lin J. “Information network or social network? the structure of the twitter follow graph,” in Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web, 2014;pp. 493–498.

  44. Cross RL, Cross RL, Parker A. The hidden power of social networks: Understanding how work really gets done in organizations. Harvard Business Press; 2004.

  45. Morales A, Borondo J, Losada J, Benito R. Efficiency of human activity on information spreading on twitter. Social Networks. 2014;39:1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Morales A J, Borondo J, Losada JC, Benito RM. “Measuring political polarization: Twitter shows the two sides of venezuela,” Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 4, 2015; vol. 25, no. 3, p. 03311.

  47. Granovetter M.“The strength of weak ties,” in Social networks, 1977; pp. 347–367, Elsevier.

  48. Erdos P, Rényi S. On the evolution of random graphs. Publ Math Inst Hung Acad Sci. 1960;5(1):17–60.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Taleb N. Antifragile: Things that gain from disorder. New York, New York: Random House; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. MIT Media Lab, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Alfredo J. Morales, Shahar Somin, Yaniv Altshuler & Alex Sandy Pentland

  2. Endor Ltd., Tel Aviv, Israel

    Shahar Somin & Yaniv Altshuler

Authors
  1. Alfredo J. Morales
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shahar Somin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yaniv Altshuler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alex Sandy Pentland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alfredo J. Morales.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest associated with this research paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Morales, A.J., Somin, S., Altshuler, Y. et al. Patterns of User Behavior and Token Adoption on ERC20. SN COMPUT. SCI. 4, 753 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-023-02200-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-023-02200-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation