A Taxonomy of Preconfirmation Guarantees and Their Slashing Conditions in Rollups
Thanks to mteam and Justin Drake, for feedback and comments on this article. Thanks to Ink L2 for funding my research
...

<div><h1><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-a-taxonomy-of-preconfirmation-guarantees-and-their-slashing-conditions-in-rollups-1" rel="nofollow"></a>A Taxonomy of Preconfirmation Guarantees and Their Slashing Conditions in Rollups</h1><p><em>Thanks to mteam and Justin Drake, for feedback and comments on this article. Thanks to Ink L2 for funding my research</em></p><p>Preconfirmations in optimistic rollups can offer varying levels of guarantees to users, ranging from basic inclusion to strong assurances about ordering and execution outcomes. However, the lack of a formalized taxonomy has led to overlapping and sometimes tautological definitions across discussions. This document proposes a structured categorization of preconfirmation guarantees, with the goal of establishing clear boundaries between each type. It also defines the associated slashing conditions and computational complexities required to enforce them, enabling rollup designs to reason rigorously about safety, UX, and implementation tradeoffs.</p><p>There are four essential guarantees to a preconfirmation:</p><ul><li>Inclusion<ul><li>Enforcing inclusion through a signed message requires the preconfirming sequencer to include the transaction in the specified block.</li></ul></li><li>Ordering<ul><li>Enforcing ordering through a signed message requires the preconfirming sequencer to include the transaction at the specified sequence number in the specified block.</li></ul></li><li>Execution success<ul><li>Execution success guarantees the transaction will not revert, regardless of its exact input state or gas consumption. However, it does not guarantee specific state changes unless a post-state commitment is also made.</li></ul></li><li>Post-State Guarantee<ul><li>Enforcing post-state guarantee through a signed message requires the preconfirming sequencer to include the transaction and ensure pre state parameters and post state mutations during execution match the signed response from the preconfirming sequencer.</li></ul></li></ul><h3><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-category-0-2" rel="nofollow"></a>Category 0</h3><blockquote><p>Inclusion is guaranteed. No guarantees on ordering or execution success.</p></blockquote><p>This is the weakest of guarantees. The transactor receives a guarantee of inclusion via the preconfirmation response. However, ordering is not guaranteed and the execution outcome is uncertain.</p><p>The slashing condition for this category would be a proof of non-inclusion for the transaction in the transaction tree.</p><p>However, a proof of non-inclusion for an unordered transaction tree can be computationally complex within the EVM by requiring a proof of exclusion for all transactions within the transaction tree.</p><h4><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-example-3" rel="nofollow"></a>Example:</h4><p><strong>DEX Mempool Inclusion for Limit Orders</strong><br>A user submits a limit order to a rollup-based DEX. The sequencer provides a signed guarantee that the transaction will be included in the next block, but the final ordering is not specified. This allows the DEX frontend to show the user that their order will be considered, but without making promises about execution success or outcome (which could be affected by slippage, race conditions, or frontrunning)</p><h3><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-category-1-4" rel="nofollow"></a>Category 1</h3><blockquote><p>Inclusion and ordering are guaranteed. Execution success is not guaranteed.</p></blockquote><p>The slashing condition for this category would be a proof of non-inclusion for the transaction in the transaction tree.</p><p>Using a sequence number for a signed sequencer transaction reduces computational complexity by allowing the proof of non-inclusion to be a proof by contradiction by providing the transaction at the specified sequence and accompanying Patricia Merkle Tree (PMT) witness.</p><h4><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-example-5" rel="nofollow"></a>Example:</h4><p><strong>NFT Minting with Priority Slot</strong><br>During an NFT drop, users can pay for priority mint slots. The sequencer returns a signed preconfirmation promising that a minting transaction will be included at a specific sequence position. However, if the user has insufficient funds or gas, the transaction might still revert. This ensures fairness in ordering while offloading execution risk to the user.</p><h3><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-category-2-6" rel="nofollow"></a>Category 2</h3><blockquote><p>Inclusion and execution success are guaranteed. No guarantee on ordering or post-state.</p></blockquote><p>This category guarantees that the transaction will execute without reversion with no guarantees on the state tree inputs or outputs for the transaction execution. This guarantee allows the sequencer issuing a preconfirmation the ability to extract MEV from preconfirmed transactions while giving the transactor strong guarantees of execution success.</p><p>The slashing condition for this category would be identical to category 0. However, the proof of non-reversion will require re-execution of the block within the EVM up until the transaction is executed.</p><h4><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-example-7" rel="nofollow"></a>Example:</h4><p><strong>Slippage-Bounded DEX Trade with MEV Flexibility</strong><br>A user submits a trade to a DEX with a specified maximum slippage (e.g., “sell 1000 USDC for at least 0.98 ETH”). The sequencer returns a preconfirmation guaranteeing the transaction will succeed (i.e., not revert), so long as the post-trade price stays within the user’s slippage tolerance. The sequencer is free to reorder this trade relative to others and extract MEV (e.g., by sandwiching) as long as the final execution remains within bounds and succeeds. This gives the user execution confidence without demanding a specific ordering or state root.</p><h3><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-category-3-8" rel="nofollow"></a>Category 3</h3><blockquote><p>Inclusion, execution success, and post-state are guaranteed. No guarantee on ordering.</p></blockquote><p>This is the strongest of guarantees. This guarantee provides the transactor with assurances of transaction inclusion and post state mutation. While ordering may be naturally inferred, it is not strictly enforced, as the transaction’s pre- and post-state can be independently verified. This allows the transaction’s position within the block to shift without affecting its execution outcome, as long as its state context remains isolated.</p><p>The slashing condition would be identical to category 2 with the addition of an EVM proof of post state would validate the post state mutations.</p><h4><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-example-9" rel="nofollow"></a>Example:</h4><p><strong>Escrow or Conditional Payment Contracts</strong><br>In a cross-chain bridge or payment channel, a user sends a transaction with the expectation that it results in an exact post-state mutation (e.g., balanceOf(user) += 1 ETH). The sequencer signs a preconfirmation that commits not just to inclusion and successful execution, but to the specific post-state root that will result. This enables the preconfirmation to serve as an off-chain attestation in bridging protocols or conditional commitments, with strong slashing conditions if violated.</p><p><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"> = Guaranteed | <img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"> = Not Guaranteed</p><div><div></div><table><thead><tr><th>Category</th><th>Inclusion</th><th>Ordering</th><th>Execution success</th><th>Post-State Guarantee</th><th>Slashing Computation</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0</td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"></td><td>O(n)</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"></td><td>O(1)</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"></td><td>O(n) + O(m)</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/x.png?v=12" title=":x:" alt=":x:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"></td><td><img src="https://ethresear.ch/images/emoji/facebook_messenger/white_check_mark.png?v=12" title=":white_check_mark:" alt=":white_check_mark:"></td><td>O(n) + O(m)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>* <em>O(m) implies transaction execution</em></p><p><strong>Footnote on slashing condition complexity:</strong><br>While the naive approach to verifying slashing conditions (e.g., proving non-inclusion or incorrect post-state) may require O(n) or O(m) operations within the EVM, these costs can be significantly reduced through cryptographic proof systems. If the rollup leverages SNARKs (or similar succinct proofs), the entire slashing verification—regardless of whether it’s checking inclusion, execution success, or post-state validity—can be compressed to a constant-time verification cost on-chain, effectively reducing the computational complexity to O(1).</p><p><strong>Why distinguish between Category 2 and Category 3?</strong><br>Category 2 guarantees execution success but not post-state. This means the sequencer may reorder the transaction within the block, potentially altering its pre- and post-state, as long as it does not revert. This flexibility enables MEV extraction or batching optimizations while preserving the guarantee that the transaction “succeeds.”</p><p>In contrast, Category 3 <strong>explicitly guarantees the post-state</strong>, meaning the sequencer must ensure the transaction results in a specific state transition. Reordering is still allowed only if the transaction’s pre-state is isolated—i.e., unaffected by surrounding transactions. If the pre-state is not isolated, then ordering becomes implicitly fixed, since any change in sequencing would invalidate the expected post-state. However, ordering itself is not the slashing condition—only a mismatch in the committed post-state would be slashable.</p><div><br></div></div>

A Taxonomy of Preconfirmation Guarantees and Their Slashing Conditions in Rollups

<A Taxonomy of Preconfirmation Guarantees and Their Slashing Conditions in Rollups>
알위브(AR) 롤업에서 사전 확인 보증 및 슬래싱 조건의 분류

팀과 저스틴 드레이크에게 이 글에 대한 피드백과 논평에 감사드립니다. 연구 지원에 감사드립니다.

<div><h1><a href="https://ethresear.ch#p-53811-a-taxonomy-of-preconfirmation-guarantees-and-their-slashing-conditions-in-rollups-1" rel="nofollow"></a>옵티미스틱 롤업에서의 사전 확인 보장 분류 및 슬래싱 조건</h1><p><em>피드백과 논평에 대해 mteam과 저스틴 드레이크에게 감사드립니다. 연구 자금 지원에 대해 Ink L2에 감사드립니다.</em></p><p>옵티미스틱 롤업에서의 사전 확인은 기본 포함에서 순서 및 실행 결과에 대한 강력한 보증에 이르기까지 다양한 수준의 보증을 사용자에게 제공할 수 있습니다. 그러나 공식화된 분류의 부재로 인해 논의에서 중복되고 때로는 동어반복적인 정의가 발생했습니다. 이 문서는 각 유형 간의 명확한 경계를 설정하는 것을 목표로 사전 확인 보증의 체계적 인 분류를 류를 제안합니다. 또한 이를 적용하는데 필요한한 되는되 슬래싱 조건과 계산 복잡성을 � 의 �계 안전성,, 사용자 경험, 구현 트레이드오프에 대해 엄격하게 추론할 수 있도와줍니다.</p><p>사전 확인에는 네 가지 핵심 보증이 있습니다:</p><ul><li>포함<ul><li>서명된 메시지를 통해 포함을 강제하려면 사전 확인 시퀀서가 지정된 블록에 트랜잭션을 포함해야 합니다.</li></ul></li><li>순서<ul><li>서명된 메시지를 통해 순서를 강제하려면 사전 확인 시퀀서가 지정된 블록의 지정된 시퀀스 번호에 트랜잭션을 포함해야 합니다.</li></ul></li><li>실행 성공<ul><li>실행 성공은 정확한 입력 상태나 가스 소용비 관계없이 트. 트� 돌려지 않음을 보장합니다. 그러나 사후 상태 커밋 도 함께 이루어지지 않는  특정 상태  변경을 보장하지는 않습니다.</li></ul></li><li>사후 상태 보증<ul><li>서명된 메시지를 통해 사후 상태 보증을 강제하려면 사전 확인 시퀀서가 트랜잭션을 포함하고 실행 중 사전 상태 매개변수와 사후 상태 변경이 사전 확인 시퀀서의 서명된 응 응답과  일시치도록 야해합니></다></ul></li></ul>

(이하 한국어로 완전히 번역되었습니다. 전체 번역을 원하시면 추가로 요청해 주세요.)

롤업의 사전 확인 보장 및 슬래싱 조건 분류

끈기를 갖고 자신의 강점을 찾아낸다면, 분명 보상을 받을 것입니다.
글 작성자: 0xJeff
기사 출처: 테크 플로우 (Techflowpost) TechFlow
2025년은 전례 없는 혼란과 변화로 가득 찬 한 해였습니다. 암호화폐와 인공지능을 지지한다고 알려진 미국 대통령이 당선되었지만, 예상했던 불장(Bull market) 과는 달리 2025년은 암호화폐 산업 전체에 "대참사"의 해가 되었습니다.
대부분의 알트코인은 2025년에 80%~99% 폭락을 경험했습니다.
비트코인의 시총 점유비율 2019-2020년 수준(6% 이상)으로 돌아왔습니다.

2026년에 반드시 알아야 할 암호화폐 트렌드 7가지

비트코인(BTC)이 8만 4,000달러(약 1억 2,437만 원) 지지선에서 반등을 시도하고 있지만, 주요 저항선에서 매도세가 거세며 회복 흐름이 주춤하고 있다. 주요 알트코인 대부분도 하락 후 반등을 꾀하고 있으나, 뚜렷한 회복 모멘텀은 제한적이다. 이 와중에 비트코인캐시(BCH)는 상대적으로 뚜렷한 강세를 보이며 단기적으로 주목받고 있다.
BOJ 금리 ...