LiquiLM: Bridging the Semantic Gap in Liquidity Flaw Audit via DCN and LLMs
arXiv SecurityArchived Apr 07, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2604.03860v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Traditional consensus mechanisms, such as Proof of Stake (PoS), increasingly reveal an excessive dependency on large liquidity providers. Although the Proof of Liquidity (PoL) mechanism serves as a critical paradigm for incentivizing sustained liquidity provision and ensuring market stability, its transition from asset staking to active liquidity management significantly increases the complexity of underlying smart contract economic models and inte
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Cryptography and Security
[Submitted on 4 Apr 2026]
LiquiLM: Bridging the Semantic Gap in Liquidity Flaw Audit via DCN and LLMs
Zekai Liu, Xiaoqi Li, Wenkai Li, Zongwei Li
Traditional consensus mechanisms, such as Proof of Stake (PoS), increasingly reveal an excessive dependency on large liquidity providers. Although the Proof of Liquidity (PoL) mechanism serves as a critical paradigm for incentivizing sustained liquidity provision and ensuring market stability, its transition from asset staking to active liquidity management significantly increases the complexity of underlying smart contract economic models and interaction logic. This renders hidden liquidity logic flaws difficult to detect via traditional methods, seriously threatening the system stability and user asset security of mainstream DeFi and emerging PoL ecosystems. To address this, we propose the LiquiLM framework, which integrates Large Language Models (LLMs) with a Dynamic Co-Attention Network (DCN). By establishing a dynamic interaction between liquidity-critical contracts and flaw descriptions, the framework effectively bridges the semantic gap between underlying code implementations and high-level liquidity intents. We evaluate the performance of LiquiLM on 1,490 validation contracts (covering precision, recall, specificity, and F1-score). The results show that it achieves significant effectiveness in auditing and explaining liquidity flaws: in experiments using Gemini 3 Pro and GPT-4o as backbone models, respectively, the F1-scores both exceed 90%. Furthermore, through an in-depth audit of 1,380 real-world PoL and Ethereum economic contracts, LiquiLM successfully identifies 238 high-risk contracts and assists in discovering 10 vulnerabilities that have received CVE certification.
Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR)
Cite as: arXiv:2604.03860 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2604.03860v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.03860
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Zekai Liu [view email]
[v1] Sat, 4 Apr 2026 20:49:09 UTC (5,047 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.CR
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-04
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)