Sharing an observation: lately you can constantly spot some “coincidental transfers” on-chain— for example, one address splits a deposit into several small amounts and sends them into a cross-chain bridge, then they get aggregated on the new chain and dispersed again. A lot of people think it’s random wash trading, but if you break down the paths, it’s actually quite patterned. I’ve gotten into the habit of treating this kind of pattern like a paper-folding diagram: first you fold out the “entry creases,” then look at the “middle layers,” and finally see the “exit closure.” In plain terms, you first trace the initial source of funds (most often a CEX or an aggregator), then check whether the middle layer has repeated Gas patterns or time windows, and finally find the aggregation address on the target chain. If you break down the process, it can be divided into reproducible steps. The AI Agent narrative has been pretty hot recently, but some automated trading scripts are also mimicking these “coincidental” routes— the goal is to conceal intent. I looked around, and what I actually think the most security-obsessed players do is add an extra layer of validation at every node— for example, checking whether Gas consumption matches “human” habits. Well, the key to paper-folding is that every crease has to be clear, otherwise the whole thing collapses. That crease says a lot.