What Are Intent-Centric Blockchains?

Understanding User Intent

Intent-centric architecture is based on declarative programming that states the end goal which is then interpreted by the blockchain. In the case of our previous example of arbitrage or DeFi yield farming, an intent-centric architecture will allow the code to state some declarative constraint for profitable arbitrage or yield farming. 

The pre-processing layer, critical for intent-centric blockchains, then collects this data based on a set of overlapping intents and interprets it before separating it for execution in the most efficient way possible. Overlapping intents here could be all declarative constraints that want to profit from arbitrage or make money by moving funds between the most profitable liquidity pools. The code written for intent-centric architecture also allows users and not applications to decide whether they want their transactions to be private or open.

Traditional blockchains like Bitcoin and Ethereum use an imperative or command-style architecture that lets users write codes with functions representing a range of actions initiated from a user account specifying what must be done on the blockchain. The code is structured as an instruction telling the blockchain what it must do using imperative or rule-based programming like Solidity. 

Intent-centric blockchains come with a different perspective built around user intent that adds entire state transitions to on-chain transactions. 

Building applications or writing programs on a blockchain like Ethereum requires writing lines of Solidity code, several lines in most cases that make up a smart contract. These contracts often include instructions that import and call other smart contracts like reentrancy guard.sol for security,  or flash loan contracts to borrow assets. 

The goal of doing this could be as simple as wanting to monitor price differences between decentralized exchanges for arbitrage or adding funds to liquidity pools that meet a profit threshold.  Such smart contracts that define the range of instructions to be executed using an account are based on imperative programming. The programming is imperative because it sets the rules for achieving specific objectives such as arbitrage or yield farming as mentioned earlier. 

Benefits of Intent-Centric Blockchains

User-Centric

Intent-centric blockchain focuses on the user who uses the network to achieve specific objectives such as sending tokens to someone. Intent-centric blockchains aim to increase usability by letting users describe what they want instead of writing a series of steps.

Simplicity

Intent-centric blockchains let users focus on expressing their intent expressed in their intended outcome while the pre-processing layer, known as a solver identifies the best steps required to achieve user desired outcomes.

Efficiency

The protocol handles the complexities of transaction execution on intent-centric blockchains through a third-party pre-processing layer that finds the most efficient way to implement and achieve the outcome. These pre-processors can batch similar transactions together for execution to reduce cost and maximize the desired outcome.

Transparency

Submitting intents to the blockchain allows for clarity from the start. Instead of trying to figure out how to achieve an objective, the code written is simply a statement of what needs to be achieved. 

Security 

Most attacks on blockchain protocols often target smart contracts, a misstep in writing smart contract code could create an exploitable loophole that may be undetectable by advanced auditing due to the complexity of the steps involved. Delegating such processes to pre-processing layers could serve as an extra layer of security.

Problems With Intent-Centric Blockchains

Security Risk

Although delegating intent interpretation to pre-processors adds extra layers of security to blockchain transactions. The pre-processing layer itself may be vulnerable if it is not properly vetted or checked putting user transactions at risk. 

Centralization

Leaving users at the mercy of pre-processors also undermines their sovereignty and creativity. Solvers can become malicious actors as we have seen with searchers and validators profiting off sandwich attacks which negatively impacts users on Ethereum. 

Misinterpretation

Another likely scenario that may result from poorly specified intent is a wrong interpretation by third-party processors. Users will not get the outcome they desire in such cases. 

Examples of Intent-Driven Interactions on Blockchains

Consider you want to create a DApp that buys liquidated assets at a lower price from lending protocols like Aave to sell at a higher price in the open market. The steps on a user intent blockchain could include:

1. Visit lending DApps, e.g. Aave, Compound, and Maker.

2. Intent: find and buy liquidated assets below the liquidation threshold and resell for profit.

3. The blockchain-based or third-party pre-processors handle searching these protocols, executing purchases, and reselling for profit.

Intent-Driven Blockchain Networks

Anoma 

The Anoma network is the first general-purpose intent-centric architecture designed to scale blockchains like Ethereum. The network works as a counterparty discovery, information flow control, solving, and atomic multi-chain settlement layer for compatible blockchains. 

Other Blockchains

It is important to understand that many blockchains particularly, Cere, Fluree, and Hedera, along with Oasis Network, Tari, Polkadot, Polygon, and Avalanche have specific features that align with intent-centric principles. Ethereum and other layer 1 chains are evolving to become intent-centric through rollups and upgrades. 

Output

Intent-centric blockchain architecture offers a secure, flexible, and efficient solution that takes the bulk of the work from users by executing their intent in the most efficient way possible. With intent-centric architecture, blockchain adoption will become faster as ordinary users with less sophistication will be able to achieve more on-chain. Complex processes will also be executed faster while a new economy of pre-processors will evolve to take on the bulk of the load. Developers can also save time on application development while users will stay protected from the risks of writing out complex logic to complete processes. While there are shortcomings such as malicious acting pre-processors, and third-party, it is possible to create mechanisms on-chain to prevent these excesses.