TxSum: User-Centered Ethereum Transaction Understanding with Micro-Level Semantic Grounding
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding the economic intent of Ethereum transactions is critical for user safety, yet current tools expose only raw on-chain data or surface-level intent, leading to widespread ``blind signing'' (approving transactions without understanding them). Through interviews with 16 Web3 users, we find that effective explanations should be structured, risk-aware, and grounded at the token-flow level. Motivated by these findings, we formulate TxSum, a new domain-grounded NLP task for DeFi transaction explanation, and construct a dataset of 187 complex Ethereum transactions with 2,375 token-flow annotations and transaction-level summaries. We further introduce MATEX, a grounded multi-agent framework for high-stakes transaction explanation. It selectively retrieves external knowledge under uncertainty and audits explanations against raw traces to improve token-flow-level factual consistency. MATEX achieves the strongest overall explanation quality, especially on micro-level factuality and intent quality. It improves user comprehension on complex transactions from 52.9% to 76.5% over the strongest baseline and raises malicious-transaction rejection from 36.0% to 88.0%, while maintaining a low false-rejection rate on benign transactions.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 66 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Dec 2025.
Builds on
23 of 66 references.
References · 23
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
- 2025Qwen3-VL Technical Reportcited by 2,534
- 2025LLMs Get Lost In Multi-Turn Conversationcited by 400
- 2020Thinking Fast and Slow in AIcited by 67
- 2018Securify: Practical Security Analysis of Smart Contractscited by 61
- 2024Combining Fine-Tuning and LLM-based Agents for Intuitive Smart Contract Auditing with Justificationscited by 41
- 2025HedgeAgents: A Balanced-aware Multi-agent Financial Trading Systemcited by 24
- 2025Unsafe LLM-Based Search: Quantitative Analysis and Mitigation of Safety Risks in AI Web Searchcited by 15
- 2025XFinBench: Benchmarking LLMs in Complex Financial Problem Solving and Reasoningcited by 12
- 2024On the Generalization and Adaptation Ability of Machine-Generated Text Detectors in Academic Writingcited by 10
- 2025SCALM: Detecting Bad Practices in Smart Contracts Through LLMscited by 8
11 more
- 2025TH-Bench: Evaluating Evading Attacks via Humanizing AI Text on Machine-Generated Text Detectorscited by 8
- 2025Auditing Data Membership in Reinforcement Learning With Verifiable Rewardscited by 6
- 2025GasAgent: A Multi-Agent Framework for Automated Gas Optimization in Smart Contractscited by 5
- 2025Know Your Intent: An Autonomous Multi-Perspective LLM Agent Framework for DeFi User Transaction Intent Miningcited by 4
- 2024PonziLens+: Visualizing Bytecode Actions for Smart Ponzi Scheme Identificationcited by 3
- 2025Large Language Models for Cryptocurrency Transaction Analysis: A Bitcoin Case Studycited by 3
- 2024Cross-Chain Options: A Bridgeless, Universal, and Efficient Approachcited by 2
- 2024Stealing Trust: Unraveling Blind Message Attacks in Web3 Authenticationcited by 1
- 2024I Experienced More than 10 DeFi Scams: On DeFi Users' Perception of Security Breaches and Countermeasurescited by 1
- 2024PrettiSmart: Visual Interpretation of Smart Contracts via Simulationcited by 1
- 2025TraceLLM: Security Diagnosis Through Traces and Smart Contracts in Ethereumcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.