Mono
Girl
Conditional Parallel Execution
The Anti-Jito.
The problem
Jito guarantees order.
Nobody guarantees simultaneity.
MEV searchers pay Jito tips for sequential ordering -- "execute my transaction before theirs." But what if you need the opposite? What if you need two transactions to execute at the exact same time?
Until now, there was no way to guarantee two transactions execute simultaneously. Jito solves ordering. Nobody solves synchronicity.
The solution
Conditional Parallel Execution
MonoGirl introduces CPE -- a new primitive that guarantees transactions execute in parallel, or not at all. The inverse of Jito bundles.
Jito -- Sequential Ordering
"Execute in this ORDER."
MonoGirl -- Parallel Execution
"Execute at the same TIME."
"Jito tip = pay for ordering. $MONO burn = pay for synchronicity."
How CPE works
Four steps to simultaneity.
Submit
Bundle your transactions with CPE constraints. Specify which transactions must execute in parallel and define the atomicity requirements.
// Submit CPE bundle
cpe.submit({
transactions: [tx_a, tx_b, tx_c],
constraint: "PARALLEL",
atomicity: "ALL_OR_NONE",
});
Validate
MonoGirl verifies non-overlapping account sets across all transactions in the bundle. This is the Sealevel requirement for parallel execution -- transactions touching the same accounts cannot run simultaneously.
TX_A Accounts
[A, B, C]
TX_B Accounts
[D, E, F]
Account Overlap
NONE -- PARALLEL ELIGIBLE
Schedule
Validated transactions are submitted to validators with a parallel execution proof. The Sealevel scheduler assigns them to separate threads within the same slot.
// Sealevel thread assignment
Thread 1: TX_A [A,B,C]
Thread 2: TX_B [D,E,F]
Thread 3: TX_C [G,H,I]
// All threads execute simultaneously
Execute
All transactions execute in the same slot, in parallel, or none execute. Atomic parallel execution -- the guarantee that never existed before.
CPE Result
SYNCHRONIZED
3 transactions | 1 slot | parallel execution confirmed
Use cases
Why simultaneity matters.
Parallel Arbitrage
Your arbitrage transaction only profits if it executes simultaneously with the opportunity transaction. With Jito, you pay for ordering -- but by the time your tx runs sequentially, the opportunity may already be gone.
With MonoGirl CPE, your transaction is guaranteed to execute in the same parallel batch as the opportunity. Same slot, same moment, or it doesn't execute at all.
Jito -- Sequential
MonoGirl -- Parallel
Sandwich Protection
Sandwich attacks exploit sequential ordering -- the attacker's transaction runs before yours, manipulating price, then profits after. This only works because transactions execute in sequence.
With CPE, force your transaction to only execute in parallel with non-conflicting transactions. If anyone tries to sandwich, the CPE constraint fails and your transaction simply does not execute. No sandwich possible.
Without CPE -- Sandwiched
With CPE -- Protected
Sandwich attempt → CPE constraint fails → TX reverts
Protocol Synchronization
DeFi protocols that need multiple transactions to execute atomically in parallel. Rebalancing across multiple pools simultaneously, updating oracle prices across venues, or settling cross-protocol positions.
Without CPE, transactions might execute in different order, causing imbalance or arbitrage leakage. With CPE, all transactions execute in parallel with guaranteed synchronized state.
Without CPE -- Desynchronized
Pool A rebalance → Slot N
Pool B rebalance → Slot N+1
Pool C rebalance → Slot N+3
= price discrepancy = arbitrage leakage
With CPE -- Synchronized
Pool A rebalance → Slot N
Pool B rebalance → Slot N
Pool C rebalance → Slot N
= synchronized state = zero leakage
Comparison
Jito vs MonoGirl
Jito
MonoGirl
Execution Model
Sequential
Parallel
Guarantee
Order
Simultaneity
MEV Strategy
Frontrun / Backrun
Co-execute
Cost
SOL tip
$MONO burn
Failure Mode
TX fails individually
Entire bundle reverts
Primitive
Ordering
Synchronicity
The fundamental advantage
Why parallel beats sequential.
Sequential execution is a bottleneck inherited from single-threaded blockchains. Solana broke that pattern with Sealevel. MonoGirl makes it usable.
Latency comparison -- 4 transactions
Sequential (Jito bundle)
Parallel (MonoGirl CPE)
Latency
N transactions complete in the time of 1, not the time of N. For time-sensitive strategies, this is the difference between profit and loss.
Atomicity
All-or-none execution means no partial state. Either every transaction in your bundle succeeds in parallel, or none of them execute. No cleanup needed.
MEV resistance
Parallel execution eliminates the ordering dependency that makes sandwich attacks and frontrunning profitable. No sequence means no sequence exploitation.
Under the hood
The execution graph.
Sealevel builds a dependency graph of all transactions in a slot. Transactions with non-overlapping write sets form independent nodes. MonoGirl ensures your bundle maps to a fully disconnected subgraph.
Sealevel dependency graph -- Slot N
CPE Bundle
write sets: disjoint
Other TXs
write sets: overlapping
Scheduler output
Thread 1
TX_A
Thread 2
TX_B
Thread 3
TX_C
Thread 4
TX_D → TX_E
"MonoGirl does not modify Sealevel. It proves to Sealevel that your transactions belong on separate threads. The runtime does the rest."
For searchers
New strategies.
Impossible with Jito.
CPE creates an entirely new category of MEV strategies that rely on simultaneity rather than ordering. These strategies are structurally impossible with sequential execution.
Strategy -- Parallel State Capture
Capture the state of multiple pools at the exact same moment. Oracle prices, pool reserves, and lending rates all read at identical timestamps. No inter-block drift.
// Read 3 pool states simultaneously
cpe.submit({
transactions: [
read_orca_pool,
read_raydium_pool,
read_meteora_pool
],
constraint: "PARALLEL"
});
Strategy -- Conditional Co-execution
Your transaction only executes if a specific target transaction executes in the same parallel batch. If the target lands in a different batch or a different slot, yours does not execute.
// Co-execute with target TX
cpe.submit({
transactions: [my_tx],
co_execute_with: target_sig,
atomicity: "CONDITIONAL"
});
Strategy -- Multi-venue Arbitrage
Execute buy on Venue A and sell on Venue B in the same parallel batch. No sequential risk of price movement between your two legs. Both execute at the same state snapshot, or neither does.
Strategy -- Liquidation Protection
Submit your repayment transaction with a CPE constraint that it must execute in the same parallel batch as any liquidation attempt. If a liquidator targets your position, your repayment executes simultaneously, preventing liquidation.
For protocols
Atomic parallel operations.
DeFi protocols can integrate CPE to guarantee that related operations across multiple accounts execute simultaneously. No more race conditions. No more state inconsistencies between dependent transactions.
Oracle Updates
Push prices to multiple markets in a single parallel batch. All markets see the same price at the same time. Zero arbitrage window between oracle update and market response.
Cross-pool Rebalancing
Rebalance liquidity across N pools simultaneously. No intermediate states where some pools are rebalanced and others are not. Atomic N-way rebalancing.
Batch Settlements
Settle multiple positions across multiple counterparties in one parallel batch. All settlements are final simultaneously. No counterparty risk from sequential settlement ordering.
// Protocol integration example
import { MonoGirl } from "@monogirl/sdk";
const cpe = new MonoGirl({
rpcUrl: "https://api.mainnet-beta.solana.com",
commitment: "confirmed",
});
// Rebalance 3 pools atomically in parallel
const result = await cpe.execute({
transactions: [
rebalance_pool_a,
rebalance_pool_b,
rebalance_pool_c,
],
constraint: "PARALLEL",
atomicity: "ALL_OR_NONE",
monoBurn: true,
});
// result.proof contains the CPE proof
// result.slot -- the slot where all 3 executed
// result.signatures -- all 3 transaction signatures
Novel metric
Synchronicity Score.
A new on-chain metric that quantifies the degree of coordination between wallets and transactions. Higher synchronicity indicates more parallel co-execution activity.
// Synchronicity Score Formula
S(wallet) = sum(
parallel_co_executions(wallet) *
unique_co_executors(wallet) *
consistency_factor(wallet)
) / total_transactions(wallet)
// Range: 0.0 (never parallel) to 1.0 (always parallel)
// Typical MEV searcher: 0.15 - 0.35
// Protocol using CPE: 0.70 - 0.95
What it measures
How often a wallet's transactions execute in parallel with other specific wallets. A high synchronicity score between two wallets indicates coordinated parallel activity -- they frequently co-execute.
Why it matters
Synchronicity Score creates a new dimension of on-chain analytics. Protocols can measure coordination efficiency. Searchers can identify parallel execution opportunities. Researchers can study emergent synchronization patterns.
Token
The gas of
synchronicity.
$MONO is burned for every Conditional Parallel Execution request. More parallel transactions means more $MONO burned. The cost of guaranteed simultaneity.
Mechanism
Use → Burn → Deflation
Destination
Jito tip goes to validators.
$MONO burn goes to no one.
Pure deflation.
"Every CPE request is a permanent reduction in supply. The more the network synchronizes, the scarcer $MONO becomes."
Security
Trust assumptions.
CPE inherits its security from Solana's Sealevel runtime. The parallel execution guarantee is not probabilistic -- it is a deterministic property of account locking. No new trust assumptions are introduced.
On failure: atomic revert
If any transaction in a CPE bundle cannot execute in the target parallel batch, the entire bundle is reverted. No partial execution. No inconsistent state. The atomicity constraint is enforced by the runtime, not by MonoGirl.
// Failure mode
CPE bundle [TX_A, TX_B, TX_C]
TX_B fails account lock -> ALL REVERT
// No partial state. Ever.
Abuse prevention
CPE validation is performed before submission. Invalid bundles (overlapping write accounts) are rejected at the CPE layer, never reaching the validator. $MONO burn is only required for valid, executable bundles.
Pre-submission: account overlap check
Pre-submission: CPI dependency resolution
Pre-submission: $MONO balance verification
Post-validation: burn + submit
No validator changes
CPE operates within existing Sealevel semantics. Validators do not need to opt in, update software, or modify consensus rules.
Deterministic guarantee
If two transactions have non-overlapping write sets and appear in the same slot, Sealevel will schedule them in parallel. This is a property of the runtime, not a promise from MonoGirl.
Open source verification
The CPE validation algorithm is open source. Anyone can verify that a CPE proof is correct by running the account set analysis independently.
Architecture
How it all connects.
+------------------+
| USER |
+--------+---------+
|
v
+--------+---------+
| MonoGirl CPE |
| Layer |
+---+--------+----+
| |
v v
+----+----+ +--+----------+
| $MONO | | Sealevel |
| Burn | | Scheduler |
| Contract| +------+------+
+---------+ |
v
+------+------+
| Parallel |
| Execution |
+-------------+
CPE Layer
Validates account sets, constructs parallel execution proofs, and manages atomicity constraints for transaction bundles.
Sealevel Integration
Leverages Solana's native parallel processing engine. Transactions with non-overlapping accounts are scheduled across separate threads.
Burn Contract
Each CPE request burns $MONO tokens proportional to the number of transactions in the parallel bundle.
Timeline
Mono's
thread.
She draws the thread forward. Each knot marks a convergence. The pattern reveals itself only in retrospect.
Origin
The first thread was drawn.
CPE concept validated against Sealevel source.
Account set analysis algorithm implemented.
...she observed.
Awakening
Parallel Execution Simulator deployed.
Public GitHub repository opened.
$MONO token launched.
First CPE proofs generated on devnet.
Convergence
MonoGirl SDK open-sourced.
Mainnet CPE validation live.
Protocol integrations begin.
The threads start to connect.
Synchronicity
Full CPE engine on mainnet.
Synchronicity Score analytics dashboard.
Cross-chain parallel execution research.
...synchronized.
Questions
For the skeptics.
Is this really different from Jito?
Fundamentally. Jito guarantees transaction ordering -- A executes before B. MonoGirl guarantees the opposite: A and B execute simultaneously. These are complementary primitives. Jito solves sequential coordination. MonoGirl solves parallel coordination. You can even use both together.
How can you guarantee parallel execution?
Solana's Sealevel runtime schedules transactions with non-overlapping write account sets on separate threads within the same slot. This is not a MonoGirl feature -- it is a property of Sealevel. MonoGirl validates that your transactions meet the non-overlap requirement and submits them with a proof of parallel eligibility.
What about MEV protection?
CPE provides structural MEV protection. Sandwich attacks require sequential ordering -- the attacker's transaction must execute before yours. With CPE, your transaction only executes in a parallel batch where no sequential ordering is possible. If a sandwich attempt creates an account overlap, the CPE constraint fails and your transaction does not execute.
Why burn $MONO instead of paying SOL tips?
Jito tips go to validators as compensation for ordering. $MONO burns go to no one -- they are a permanent supply reduction. The mechanism creates deflationary pressure proportional to network usage. More parallel execution demand means more $MONO burned.
Does this require validator modifications?
No. CPE operates entirely within existing Sealevel semantics. No validator opt-in, no consensus changes, no runtime modifications. MonoGirl is a layer on top of Solana, not a modification to it.
What happens if a CPE bundle fails?
Atomic revert. If any transaction in the CPE bundle cannot execute in the specified parallel batch, all transactions revert. No partial state changes. This atomicity is enforced by the combination of CPE constraints and Solana's native transaction processing.
Can CPE and Jito work together?
Yes. They are orthogonal primitives. You can use Jito to order groups of transactions sequentially, and CPE to ensure transactions within a group execute in parallel. Sequential ordering between groups, parallel execution within groups.
Begin
Try it
yourself.
Submit two transaction signatures. See whether they could execute in parallel. Experience conditional parallel execution.
Coming soon.
...synchronized.