> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://dappos.gitbook.io/docs/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://dappos.gitbook.io/docs/dappos/others/dappos-v3-retired/execution-layer/i.background-and-problem-statement.md).

# I.Background and Problem Statement

### Problems

Blockchain technology, heralded as a transformative force for decentralization, trust, and security, has experienced significant growth and innovation since its inception. The decentralized nature of blockchain ensures that no single entity has control over the entire network, thereby enhancing security and trust among participants. However, despite its potential, blockchain technology faces several limitations and challenges that impede its mass adoption.

The contemporary blockchain economy is restricted to services that can be defined by mathematical formulas. For instance, Uniswap functions as a platform connecting liquidity providers and token purchasers. These liquidity providers are limited to offering services based on preset formulas, such as selling tokens at a specific rate. This restriction hampers the development of more complex and diverse services. Moreover, users encounter significant inefficiencies due to the inability to outsource tasks effectively. For example, a user desiring to sell tokens across multiple chains faces a cumbersome process in identifying service providers and often resorts to manual operations. In contrast, many Web2 tasks can be outsourced seamlessly, providing a far smoother user experience.

Additionally, certain tasks remain unsolvable within the current on-chain framework. For example, the purchase of Web2 services using on-chain tokens is problematic due to the absence of permissionless trust in smart contracts. Tasks requiring time-bound execution or specific constraints are unmanageable on-chain. Nevertheless, if outcomes can be verified fairly and users accept predefined compensation, these tasks could be securely outsourced to a service provider. Furthermore, users are reluctant to approve contracts that access their accounts due to security concerns, necessitating manual confirmation of every detail, such as transaction fees, cross-chain operations, and private key management.

To address these limitations, the DAPPOS Intent Execution Network emerges as a compelling solution to streamline user interactions within the blockchain ecosystem. This network connects users with service providers, enhancing the efficiency of outsourcing tasks in a decentralized environment. Analogous to real-world platforms like eBay and DoorDash, where users can communicate and collaborate with service providers efficiently, a similar level of efficiency is now attainable on-chain. DAPPOS mitigates security concerns by allowing users to delegate tasks securely to service providers. This solution not only resolves existing usability issues but also extends the capabilities of Web3 applications, enabling the creation of new services previously unattainable.

For example, Ethereum smart contracts are currently limited by predefined mathematical formulas, restricting the complexity of services they can provide. An illustration of this limitation is Uniswap, where liquidity providers can only offer services based on preset formulas, without accommodating more complex requirements. DAPPOS facilitates the provision of sophisticated services akin to real-world delivery services such as DoorDash, where users do not have to worry about delivery personnel absconding with their funds. Moreover, DAPPOS enables transactions such as converting USDT to USD through services like PayPal, or using on-chain assets to subscribe to Web2 services such as OpenAI. By expanding the range of verifiable outcomes and ensuring user compensation for unmet services, DAPPOS fosters a broader array of decentralized and secure interactions.

<br>

The DAPPOS Intent Execution Network provides a decentralized framework to fulfill user intents, simplifying and securing the outsourcing of tasks. Users can specify their needs, and a network of third-party service providers can meet these intents, ensuring both security and efficiency. This innovative approach not only addresses the current limitations but also paves the way for new, complex Web3 applications, significantly enhancing the user experience within the decentralized economy.

### Introduction to Intent

Intent, in the context of blockchain transactions, refers to the desired outcomes that users want to achieve, rather than specifying the exact steps needed to reach those outcomes. For instance, instead of detailing every interaction with smart contracts, nonce management, and gas payments, users can express their desired result in a straightforward manner, leaving the intricate execution details to sophisticated third parties. This approach not only simplifies user interactions but also enhances efficiency by leveraging the expertise of third-party executors.

Intents can range from basic needs to broader, more complex requirements. As long as users are willing to pay a certain cost and expect a specific result, intents can cover a wide variety of demands. For example:

1. Buying BTC with 1000 USDT.
2. Receiving a specified amount of USD in a certain bank account.
3. Spending a certain amount of USDT or USD to receive the latest iPhone.

In conclusion, a common definition of intents is "I want X and I’m willing to pay up to C." Intents can be considered as signed messages that allow for a set of state transitions from a given starting state. Unlike traditional transactions that specify a unique computational path, intents allow for any path that satisfies certain constraints. This flexibility enables the matching of overlapping intents, increasing gas and economic efficiency.

<br>

### Current Intent-based Systems and Their Limitations

Current intent-based systems can be broadly classified into several categories based on their design and functionality:

1. Limit Orders and Auctions: Systems like CowSwap and 1inch Fusion utilize limit orders and batch auctions to match intents. These systems focus on finding the best execution prices by promoting competition among liquidity providers. However, they are often limited to specific use cases and lack the flexibility to handle more complex intents.
2. Account Abstraction (AA): Proposals like EIP 4337 introduce account abstraction, allowing users to express intents at the wallet level. This approach decouples accounts from signers, enabling custom authorization logic tailored to users' needs. However, it introduces new complexities and requires substantial changes to Ethereum’s core protocol.
3. Generalized Intent Infrastructure: Projects like Anoma and Essential aim to provide a comprehensive intent-based architecture. Anoma, for instance, utilizes a homogeneous protocol with a heterogeneous security model, allowing for decentralized counterparty discovery and solving. Essential, on the other hand, focuses on providing a modular intent layer and a new constraint-based language for more efficient intent executions. However, these projects are still under development and not accessible to users.

While intent-based designs offer significant improvements over traditional transaction methods, they are not without limitations. Current solutions often face several critical issues:

1. Limited Generalizability: Due to the constraints of current validation mechanisms, intent-based systems often lack the flexibility to be applied across a wide range of decentralized applications (dApps). These systems are typically designed to solve specific problems and are not adaptable to various use cases. For example, a system optimized for limit orders may not be suitable for more complex intents such as cross-chain transactions or interactions with multiple DeFi protocols. The validation process often restricts the types of intents that can be executed, limiting the system's generalizability.
2. Restricted Solution Space: Current solutions require synchronous execution, where all transaction components must be processed within a single blockchain block, and they lack mechanisms for pre-authorization, forcing users to manually approve each transaction. The inability to handle asynchronous operations and the lack of pre-authorization severely limit the solution space of existing intent-based systems. A practical example is the use of CowSwap, which relies solely on on-chain liquidity and cannot leverage off-chain options like OTC desks or centralized exchanges, thus restricting potential solutions.
3. Efficiency and Service Quality Issues: Many intent-based systems enforce strict on-chain processes, which are inherently slow and costly. This restriction of current solutions prevents the use of more efficient or cost-effective off-chain methods. For example, the automated market maker (AMM) model requires maintaining large amounts of liquidity on-chain, which ties up significant capital and incurs high costs. Similarly, cross-chain bridges require complex security mechanisms to ensure safe transfers, which increase both the time and financial cost of transactions. Additionally, due to the inability to handle asynchronous operations, service providers often have to bear higher service costs and potential risks. In a typical e-commerce scenario, a user might want to purchase an item, with the payment and delivery being asynchronous processes, reducing the risk for the service provider. However, current solutions require synchronous execution of intents, which increases the risk exposure for service providers. As a result, services are often slow and expensive, failing to meet the efficiency expectations of users accustomed to traditional financial systems.

In summary, while intent-based systems represent a significant advancement in simplifying user interactions and enhancing efficiency within the blockchain ecosystem, they still require more flexible and comprehensive solutions. Addressing these limitations will pave the way for a more user-friendly and efficient blockchain experience, thereby driving mass adoption and unlocking the full potential of decentralized applications and services.

<br>