What’s Happening with Cross-Chain Intents and Their Future | Goki Kato, Miki | ETHTaipei 2025

[Music] Hi everyone, it's already 1:00 p.m. So, April Fool is finished. So, in this session, no fake news, no fake data. So, don't worry.

And in this session I want to give some introductions about intents and deep dive to especially for the crosschain intents on basic on the onchain data. So sometimes people tell a lie for your friends for something but onchain data don't tell a lie. So do not have to trust just verify back to the basic and first of all I create some slido. So if you have some questions please ask me anytime and I will have some yeah asking session after that. But first of all I want to introduce myself and I'm Goki.

I'm founder of the hudaba protocols and I'm from I prefecture in Japan which is the headquarter of Toyota and I graduated from Naga University. This is a aluminum former Toyota CEO. So a lot of the people around me want to join the Toyota as a ultimate goal but I'm totally not interested in join this kind of big companies. So I want to join deep dive into the crypto before 2022 and I deeply researching and development interpreities for three years. So here's the agenda.

So first of all I make I make some introductions what is intense and next I want to give some examples like swap and crosschain intense well and I follow to the onchain queries I introduce about bridge use case and future challenges and next initiative. So first of all I want to talking talking to intense introductions but this is how Uber and Grab stepby-step users flow by introductions. So first of all if we want to go somewhere we are using some Uber grab. So first we can choose destination. I want to go to somewhere and next match the driver and next we can take a ride and if I arrive the destination I have to verify it and pay some money.

So how about we abstract this this process? So first is express intent whatever but I want to go here I want to buy something or I want to do blah blah blah and the next match executor. So on the application side they can find best performer or user or some option anywhere but we can find some best executor and the next execute intent on the taxi we can just ride and go to destination but uh intent make some actions and settle outcome. So we have to verify the transaction is successful and get some pay some fees and this is the intense flow on the blockchain. So first of all user can make some intents for example I want to swap some ease or I want to bridge some asset or I want to some NFTs anything and then on the offchain side or onchain side we can match executor.

So it's based on uh for example some price some speed or some performance but we can find some executors. So be between that uh we can using RFQ request for quotations. So a lot of executors make some quotations and we can decide it who is the best person to execute this kind of transactions and after that onchain side we can execute transactions and set is occurred. So first of all we can check the transaction is done or not and if this this is successful we can pay some revenues after that. So why we use intents?

So first of all we going to make more user experience because only user side should should have do is just make some intent and assigned transactions and after that it's automatically find some executors transactions occurred and payment is automatically done. And second point is execution optimizations. For example, on the swap side, we can find the best boot executor or crosschain swap we can find most fastest transactions exeutor. And last one is me residence uh resistance. So we can find good person not only find good person but also we can make some secure way to make transactions because intent itself is offchain.

So next step uh I want to introduction on some swap use case and first of all in the intent swap we have three point point of the view. So first one is of course we want to improve some user experience. So user side it's very difficult to find the good swap boot. So instead of this just user have to do is I want to swap A token to B token and after that easily to swap and second point is we can easy to find best executions because by RFQ uh it's automatically find good executors and last one is in terms of swap swap there are a lot of ME so we can predict this kind of ME attacks. So in this session I want to introductions about unis swap x a little bit but this is a four step on the unisop x.

So first of all declare a swap intent and auction for best swap and swap execution by filler and swap settlement. So first one declare a swap intent. So this is a front end on the unis swap and if you put on some amount and choose some tokens it's automatically calculate on the unisop side and on the unisop side compared to existing liquidities and unisop x this is a intent uh model solutions if unisop x is good performance is automatically executed by the feeder and auction for the best swap so unisap rfq right now basically using for the Dutch auction and Dutch auction at at the first time the price is good for the user side and time by time it goes down the price so it's more good by for media side or FA side and good point of the Dutch auction is fair pricing for users and incentivize first and efficient executions however the challenging is if we cannot find good solvers or feeders uh just time time sensitive ex executions and possibly inefficiently and low activities. So next uh I want to introductions about crosschain intents. So compared to swap intent crosschain intent is different goals for everyone.

So first one is gas price. We can reduce gas price compared to any existing crosschain bridge. And next is speed. So only few second we can execute transactions. And last one is securities.

By the way, why have we have to pay a lot of gas fees and waiting a lot of the time and sometimes this liquidity is rigged before like two years ago. So I want to make some introductions how to bridge in the existing model. So basically uh a lot of liquidities exist like lock and swap, lock and mint or liquidity, lock and unlock model. But basically first of all user have to lock the tokens and after that we have to make some verifications on the social side like optimistic GK validator whatever but we have to verify it and on the blockchain too uh after the verifications unlock the tokens so you user can get token but problem is first one is we have to pay gas fees for verifications and wait for f block finalizations because we have to verify the source chain transactions. And second point is if the bridge is locked mean kind of solutions they are risk that leaked tokens could be exploit or leaked in the source chain side.

So transaction flow bridge addition is first of all make some intents on the source chain side and second RFQ and third bridge executions and verifications and settlement. So first of all user have to lock the token on the blockchain one source chain side and every single offchain actor we call it solver uh observed the source chain transactions and by the RFQ the protocol decided who going to be executed at this transactions. So at this time solver a exe can execute transactions for example and this solver feel the intents before broke is finalized and user can get token. So few moment later a lot of the people using this kind of intense protocol. So some tokens are locked on the source chain side and after that transaction is verifications for example optimistic ZK validator anyway and if transaction is verified the token plus fee is unlocked for the solver side.

So why intents keybridge challenges? So first one gas fees because verification is batch and after the execution. So we can reduce some gas fees as well and for the speed uh before block is finalized on the source chain side uh the solver execute transactions on the destination chain. So this meaning like intense protocol server have some risk for block finalizations as well but user can get token as first as possible because server take a risk and third one securities. So we can this model we don't provide it source chain liquidities.

So we can reduce one point of hack point but of course every single transactions or every single verifications going to be hack point but we can reduce some kind of hack point in the intense protocol and yeah let's take a look the onchain data and I want to introductions about acuros because right now a lot of the people using the acuros and recently unisop x also integrated across protocol as well and this is some front front runner of the intent bridge. So first of all like unis swap across is also give some frontend side. So you can go some website and put some amount on the front end side. We can choose which chain we want to send and which kind of the token we want to breach and input the amount and on the acuros who going to be the executor. This is decided by the first to feel the wins.

So in across the first solver can call briefly delay becomes the executor of the transactions. So this means speed is very important for solver side and verification model across using the optimistic way. So like over every single 20 90 minute the exe execution is verified and we can choose two type of settlement options. So first one is for example I want to swap a bridge base chain to ethereum chain and solver execute on the destination chains field the intent they they have two choice. So first one if you use across LOP the solver can get directly on the Ethereum chain they can get back to their tokens or direct claim from locked fund.

So in this case the solver can choose get fund from base chain or Ethereum chain. So let's let's take a look on the onchain data. So this is some example uh which is actually executing transactions by solver side. So first one is successfully filled and delivered tokens to user on the destination chain. So it's failed and second one is failed to fill because other relayer already feel the intent.

So this relay cannot fail. So just pay the gas fees and failed to transactions. And third one is verifications. So across protocol if successful they can verify it and give back to the trans the fund to solver. And this is a relay market share by number of transactions.

So as a pie chart shows over 50% of the transactions executed by four solvers and another one is executed by like 15 15 solvers. So in the total market executing on the acuros is like 20 20 solvers they join and over the half of the transactions executed by only four top solvers and here is a by the token what kind of token is breached on the across across protocol. So over 50% uh the user bridge by rapies and 40 40% to 60% the USDC is breached and it's only 2% uh bridge by bridge to rap wrapped bitcoin and this is a relay distributions by tokens. So this pie chart show the raptor is is fully decentralizations compared to wrapped bitcoin. So the this pie chart shows if major token is bridge it's more like decentralization is decentralization bridge because a lot of the sort of join this kind of transactions but rapid bitcoin this is a minor it's only 2% of the transactions on the total so it's only few server can join this kind of market so over the 60% uh transactions execute by one solver and here's a relay volume by transactions uh relay volume by transaction volume range.

So this pie chart is number of the transactions but this pie chart is the transaction volume. So over the 60% of the transaction is executed by only one relayers. So the reason is I break down some amount of the range of the bridge tokens and over like small amount of the bridge a lot of the solver can join this kind of opportunities so they can feel the transactions but for example over the 100k plus bridge volume over the 97% uh transactions executed by one solver. So this figure shows if user want to breach some small amount a lot of server can join and compete some transactions but if big amount because some solvers cannot prepare for the tokens so bridge is not successful for this kind of solver and so this is a relaya example top transactions volume performer. So this solver prepare for over 10 millions USD on the tokens and put on the tokens every single chain like 50k to 4 millions in asset across the chain.

So this relayer can fill any kind of range of the bridge volume and next example is highest transactions count. So this server only have 40k in inventory and every single chain it's only 50k on each chain but this solver can optimize for executing transactions as firstand possible and as much as possible so they can make some capital utilizations and fill a lot of the intent. And here is another intent type of bridge but compared to across this kind of bridge is not yet decentralizations because we needed to permission in order to join the solver network. So it's only few feers join this kind of intense protocol. So this is the big four summaries.

So first one is across is compared to any kind of intense protocol a lot of server can join this kind of market and second point is we can choose what kind of strategies we going to make. So for example, if you want to make some big profit or big tractions, we can execute prepare for some a lot of inventory and execute transactions or if you want to make more trans much transaction as possible, we can set up some strategies and execute transactions. So it's depend on the solver. And third point is inventorydriven limitations. So some solvers cannot prepare for enough money in order to fill the intent.

So uh for example like over 100k intents if I want to the fail I also have to prepare for over 100k inventory as well. So it's little bit hard to some server as well. So it's not yet decentralized this kind of highly volume transactions. And fourth one is token popularity efficient. So the more major token is the more decentralized.

So it's really a distribution trend to be. And next I want to introduction some future challenges but why f decentralization is matters? I pick up three reasons. So first one is performance optimizations. So key point on the intent is how can we make RFQ request for the quote in order to optimize the output but if we cannot find good feeders the transaction is failed or user can get not good outcome.

So this is a very important to find and creating a lot of the solvers and good RFQ as well. And the second point is also livveness. So major fails goes down the entire bridge could be failed and decentralization ensures system resistance and third one is preventing intent censorship. For example, if only one solver can execute every every transactions they can choose this intent make execute or not. So this is some risk of the censorship.

So this is not good for the intense protocol system. And here is the challenges to f decentralization. So first one entry barriers. So this is like validators. If I want to join the etoriium validators I hope I have to prepare for over the 32 ease and set up some ocean node and I have to running good infrastructure.

So this is kind similar to program in order to join the solver intense market we have to set up offsh node and prepare for some inventories and we have to create some strategies so it's a little bit difficult for normal users and second point is profitabilities and es especially for the new intensebased protocol transaction volume is still low and user is still few people so this market is hard to creating strong economic incentivize for feeders to participate. And the last one is securing a large amount of the capital. So it's very hard to fill the high volume intent because we have to make a lot of the ease or a lot of USDC before fill the intent. So that's hard as well. And finally uh we can I want to introduction some initiative.

So first one is open intense framework. So built by Ethereum foundation hyperang and others. This is a shared framework for crosschain intent execution. So this is a good point is if someone want to creating new type of intense applications they don't have to creating applications from scratch but they can use open intense framework and build on very easily and not just spec uh OF is s code and infrastructure to make intense work today and finally I want to introductions our product mik a little bit but Our idea is like Ryo. So Rhy open to everyone can join the Ethereum validators market to everyone with only just staking the ease.

So this is a similar concept. So if user stakes the tokens on the miki they can get solar reward and solver side they can feel the intent by using our board. So we can break some entry barriers and a lot of the high volume it's very hard to prepare for the inventory. But if we can creating some boards the solver can borrow the asset from the board and fill the intents and also this is some niche but we can creating some gas focusing and intense aggregator which in order to make some um most profitabilities. So yeah uh that's all and if you want to join know more about intents or this slide or some onchain data let me know this is my telegram so please add to me so in the session that's all and I switch to the question I have two questions okay So first one is uh I think based rollup can solve crosschain problem.

Yeah I think so but it's depend on the price or chain as well. For example intense protocol it's not only the EVM to EVM bridge but also we can send some tokens to EVM to non EVM chain. So we have some chance to make bordered exist compared to any kind of bridge solutions or what is the risk of relia centralizations. Yeah I think this is important point because yeah uh this is a major uh intense problem. So if we cannot find good relayer or good RFQ the livveness is goes down and performance is also not good.

So this is right like centraliz just centralizations bridge on the onchain. So this is a very very problem. So I think price and speed performance and riveness is very important in order to make decentralized bridge in the future. So I think for the slido that's it and I left some four minute speech. So do you guys any questions?

Any questions for Goki? Uh hi. I guess my question is in the system that does have decentralized fillers like you you showed in your graphs that some of your fillers were doing like more than 50%. Is that is that really a risk to the system? I mean like if one filler is like taking most of the requests as long as there's one other one that one won't be able to censor some transactions, right?

Yeah. At this time, yeah. For example over the 100k case transactions they can only one solver is existed. So sometimes for example this solver for example AWS goes down this kind of transaction is failed. So this is a problem.

Yeah. So I think in the low volume there are a lot of the failures. So if some AWS or some infrastructure goes down but bridge is successful because the there are a lot of any other offchain actors but highly volume it more centralizations so we have some risk for some hacking or some stopping on the transactions so that's why we need to a lot of more server in the future. Thank you. Oh, hey.

Um, I guess one more thing on the solver decentralization. Um, I think that one of the dangers and I think like Tun wrote a good paper about this is if you have let's say a like yeah a solver that dominates like 80% of all um order flow. They can get to a point where like they capture like so much orderflow and therefore so much of the like surplus that they have basically like ability to just like take lower than they would profit to at a long enough time to basically avoid all the other solvers being able to run ever and then like basically exiting the market. Um and I think we haven't seen it yet, right? Like I think it's probably too early for that.

But that's definitely kind of like one of the concerns I think that people are having with like respect to solver centralization. Um but just more a comment but uh I'm curious on your like on your protocol about the like vaults like how do you like what's your mechanism to allow basically um like I assume you'd basically give loans to solvers so like how do you enforce that like they don't just like take the money and run with it like are they bonded are they like yeah kind of curious how that works yeah great questions so I think in the our protocol this is like crosschain versions flashons. So first of all we have to make some uh make some proof on by TE on the sain request transactions by solver side. So we can ensure this kind of transactions if this solver fail 100% uh if this transaction is su successful they're returned by return to the the tokens to solar board. So we have to make proof on the source chain request at first and the second point is solver is just uh make some requests to fill the intents but the actor actually feel the intent is B itself.

So sa not not borrow the the token directly but just requests f transactions to b sideite and b uh verify the trans request transactions and after that board fill the transactions and directly go back to fund to board as well. So only sa have to do is make strategies and make proof and send requests to Bolt. Okay. And um thank you for go reply and thank you for everyone's question. [Music]