Analysis of multi‐input multi‐output transactions in the Bitcoin network

Distinct transactions among different and unrelated users are combined together to create a single Bitcoin transaction (mixing transaction) to obfuscate the relationships among the actual participants (more specifically, the wallet addresses used for the transactions). We consider multi‐input multi‐output transactions with at least two inputs and three outputs as proxy, to analyze four characteristic periods of ∼50 days each, representing periods before the introduction of mixing, in its early days, during its growth, and after the volume of such multi‐input multi‐output transactions became more or less stabile. Structural properties and characteristics of the transaction and wallet address networks are computed and compared, through standard tools, but also via the introduction of two novel techniques that provide indicators of mixing‐like behaviors: (1) an entropy characterization to detect abnormally uniform inputs and/or outputs and (2) a connected component analysis of subgraphs formed by only multi‐input multi‐output transactions (showing cascades of such transactions). The contributions of this exploratory Bitcoin network analysis paper can thus be seen as two‐fold. At a macroscopic level, the growth and stabilization periods are shown to stand out with respect to most considered metrics, while at a microscopic level, chains of multi‐input multi‐output transactions, and transactions with outlier behavior in terms of input/output entropies are identified for further investigation.

[1]  Davor Svetinovic,et al.  Improving Bitcoin Ownership Identification Using Transaction Patterns Analysis , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems.

[2]  István Csabai,et al.  Do the Rich Get Richer? An Empirical Analysis of the Bitcoin Transaction Network , 2013, PloS one.

[3]  Murat Kantarcioglu,et al.  Blockchain Data Analytics , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM).

[4]  Jonas David Nick,et al.  Data-Driven De-Anonymization in Bitcoin , 2015 .

[5]  Frédérique E. Oggier,et al.  EGRET: Extortion Graph Exploration Techniques in the Bitcoin Network , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW).

[6]  Stefano Bistarelli,et al.  Go with the -Bitcoin- Flow, with Visual Analytics , 2017, ARES.

[7]  Matthew Green,et al.  Zerocoin: Anonymous Distributed E-Cash from Bitcoin , 2013, 2013 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy.

[8]  Anwitaman Datta,et al.  Four Bitcoin subgraphs for analysis of multi-input multi-output transactions , 2019 .

[9]  Satoshi Nakamoto Bitcoin : A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System , 2009 .

[10]  Massimo Bartoletti,et al.  A general framework for blockchain analytics , 2017, SERIAL@Middleware.

[11]  Christoph Fretter,et al.  The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Address Clustering , 2016, 2016 Intl IEEE Conferences on Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Advanced and Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing and Communications, Cloud and Big Data Computing, Internet of People, and Smart World Congress (UIC/ATC/ScalCom/CBDCom/IoP/SmartWorld).

[12]  Frédérique E. Oggier,et al.  BiVA: Bitcoin Network Visualization & Analysis , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW).

[13]  Frédérique Oggier,et al.  A 4571 node 4762 edge directed weighted Bitcoin address subgraph , 2020 .

[14]  Benjamin Fabian,et al.  Analyzing the Bitcoin Network: The First Four Years , 2016, Future Internet.

[15]  Stefano Zanero,et al.  BitIodine: Extracting Intelligence from the Bitcoin Network , 2014, Financial Cryptography.

[16]  Aleksander Berentsen Aleksander Berentsen Recommends “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” by Satoshi Nakamoto , 2019, 21st Century Economics.