Problem If Hyperdrive simply adjusts bond liquidity proportional to the liquidity being added we run into issues with price discovery and sandwich attacks. If someone adds liquidity at an irrationally high interest rate, it inflates the bond reserves so much that the rate can't be arbed back. Additionally, this creates an opportunity for a long-range sandwich attack. To mitigate this, we implement the following initialize routine. Zeta and Bond Reserves for Initialization \begin{align} &\text{We want to solve for } y \text{ and } \zeta \text{ using the following systems of equations:} \ &\quad(1) \quad c z - c \zeta + p y = c z \ &\quad(2) \quad p =\left( \frac{\mu z - \mu \zeta}{y} \right)^{t_s}\ &\text{where } c z \text{ is the amount of base the pool is initialized with. Combining (1) and (2) we have:} \ &\quad(3) \quad \zeta = z - \frac{1}{\mu}p^{\frac{1}{t_s}}y\

Hyperdrive Landing Page https://hyperdrive.trade/ Cool samples from White Zombie Songs Sampled from movie: To the Devil a Daughter https://youtu.be/SRshPCM9lhk?t=147 Sampled from movie: The Haunting https://youtu.be/SRshPCM9lhk?t=15 Sampled from interview with Patricia Krenwinkel, one of the Manson family women https://youtu.be/Cvlpktjsq0A?t=13

In the Element Protocol, depositing 1 Base Token (BT) gives you 1 Principal Token (PT) and 1 Yield Token (YT): \begin{aligned} PT + YT &= 1 \end{aligned} if a user ever saw that the market price of the PT plus the market price of the YT was greater than 1, then they could mint a PT and YT and sell it on the market for more than 1 BT. Unfortunately, YT markets in the Element Protocol were inefficient due to a lack of liquidity so this arb opportunity was rare. Additionally, inefficient YT markets limited the protocol's ability to easily provide leveraged access to the variable rate market. Hyperdrive solves this issue by combining the PT and YT markets into a single market that provides exposure to fixed and variable rates through longs and shorts. Purchasing a long is functionally identical to purchasing a PT in the Element Protocol. Purchasing a short, which is equivalent to leveraged exposure to variable rates, needed to be more straightforward than the YTC mechanism used in the Element Protocol and more efficient than the YT market; however, we did preserve the concept of what the Element Protocol determined a fair price was. We can use the fact that $PT + YT = 1$ to calculate the fair price for a YT: \begin{aligned}

Easy Label each vertext of the graph with a natural number. Label the edges with the sum of the vertext numbers each edge connects. All numbers labeled (vertices and edges) must be unique. The winning solution will be the one with the smallest sum of all the numbers labeled. Solution

Let's just remove this for now. Not worth the effort of maintaining. We can bring it back when we have a proper backend Change this: to: Our integrations show logos for:

Vulnerable in various extents [x] Teku [x] Nimbus [x] Lighthouse [x] Prsym [x] Lodestar [X] Besu [X] Nethermind

How Element Works The Element Protocol wraps yield bearing assets and splits the resulting shares into a principal and a yield token. Basic Features: PTs can be purchased at a discount to lock in a fixed yield rate Minting and Staking for additional rewards Pricing Principal Tokens Constant Power Sum Invariant

The Element Liquidity Pool bootstraps the liquidity of newly issued yield tokens by rolling over funds into each newly minted tranche. To calculate the value of these yield tokens on any particular day, we can rearrange the terms from annualized yield formula presented in the yield paper to solve for present value: \begin{equation} P=\frac{F}{(Y+1)^{T}}\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad;;;;(1) \end{equation} The next three sections will describe how we can determine the present value of the Fixed Yield Token (FYT), Yield Coupon (YC) and the total redeemable value. FYT Present Value Given an interest rate of 3%, weekly rollovers, and 1 year maturity, the present value of a FYT can be calculated as follows:

# EE Tooling The plan is to take an iterative approach to the development of EE Tooling. Each iteration will begin by looking at the existing process, creating a plan to address existing issues and defining a worksplit. ## Iteration 1 ### Current EE Development Experience 1) Pick a language: Rust, Assembly Script, C, C++, etc 2) Write the code for your EE: i. define memory layout: SSZ, Solidity-style, etc ii. define proof backend (localdb): Sparse Merkle Trees, Merkle Patricia Tree