Rationale for the blackjack strategy about coinselect HOT 5 CLOSED

@Runn1ng there is an in-repo fee simulator: https://github.com/bitcoinjs/coinselect/tree/master/stats

I optimized the default export to be the lowest fees over time, but it'd be great to see your take on the approach taken.

from coinselect.

What is the rationale for using blackjack strategy, for selecting the exact match?

My approach assumes a descending by-value UTXO set, with an accumulative exact match strategy to attempt fee minimisation. It isn't perfect.

from coinselect.

It seems the code for the simulation PDF is here - https://github.com/Xekyo/CoinSelectionSimulator - I will look it up and try to run some experiments, to have something to reason with here :)

from coinselect.

Thanks for comments!

I have tried to run the scala simulation code from @xekyo with the gambling hot wallet data (the simulation has a starting UTXO set and a set of value changes) - it actually seems that the strategies all return more or less the same fees, if you add total fees + cost to spend the remaining UTXOs.

The strategy that seem to work the best for the simulation (when total fees+cost to spend the rest is optimized) is Branch and Bound.

I will try to now run your simulation, plus try to understand @xekyo's Branch and Bound algorithm and port it into JS and into this code.

from coinselect.

I am closing this, since BnB is a different strategy

from coinselect.