We model the ultimate price paid by users of a decentralized ledger as resulting from a two-stage game where Miners (/Proposers/etc.) first purchase blockspace via a Tullock contest, and then price that space to users. When analyzing our distributed ledger model, we find: - A characterization of all possible pure equilibria (although pure equilibria are not guaranteed to exist). - A natural sufficient condition, implied by Regularity (a la [Mye81]), for existence of a ''market-clearing'' pure equilibrium where Miners choose to sell all space allocated by the Distributed Ledger Protocol, and that this equilibrium is unique. - The market share of the largest miner is the relevant ''measure of decentralization'' to determine whether a market-clearing pure equilibrium exists. - Block rewards do not impact users' prices at equilibrium, when pure equilibria exist. But, higher block rewards can cause pure equilibria to exist. We also discuss aspects of our model and how they relate to blockchains deployed in practice. For example, only ''patient'' users (who are happy for their transactions to enter the blockchain under any miner) would enjoy the conclusions highlighted by our model, whereas ''impatient'' users (who are interested only for their transaction to be included in the very next block) still face monopoly pricing.
High-frequency trading, in both traditional and decentralized markets, induces latency races and redundant order flow as traders spend resources to win time-sensitive opportunities. We show that auctioning artificial time priority can redirect resources away from wasteful speed races toward auction payments. While such waste is difficult to measure in traditional markets, blockchain transactions provide transparent records of these competitive costs through observable duplicate submissions. We study the introduction of Timeboost, a time-priority auction mechanism on Arbitrum, a blockchain that batches transactions before settlement on Ethereum, as a natural experiment. We find that redundant transactions decrease and platform revenue increases relative to comparable networks, consistent with our theoretical predictions.
Georgios Chionas, Olga Gorelkina, Piotr Krysta, Rida Laraki
We study methods to enhance statistical privacy in blockchain transactions. We analyze economic mechanisms for privacy-aware transaction owners whose utility depends not only on the outcome of the mechanism but also negatively on the exposure of their economic preferences. First, we consider an order flow auction, where a user auctions off to specialized agents, called searchers, the right to execute her transaction while maintaining a degree of privacy. We examine how the degree of privacy affects the revenue of the auction and, broadly, the net utility of the privacy-aware user. In this new setting, we characterize the optimal auction, which is a sealed-bid auction. Subsequently, we analyze a variant of a Dutch auction in which the user gradually decreases the price and the degree of privacy until the transaction is sold. We compare the revenue of this auction to that of the optimal one as a function of the number of communication rounds. Then, we introduce a two-sided market - a privacy marketplace - with multiple users selling their transactions under their privacy preferences to multiple searchers. We propose a posted-price mechanism for the two-sided market that guarantees constant approximation of the optimal social welfare while maintaining incentive compatibility (from both sides of the market) and budget balance. This work builds on the emerging literature on privacy-preserving mechanism design, integrating statistical privacy guarantees into economic protocols to capture the impact of information leakage on blockchain users' utility.
We analyze maximal extractable value in multiple concurrent proposer blockchains, where multiple blocks become data available before their final execution order is determined. This concurrency breaks the single builder assumption of sequential chains and introduces new MEV channels, including same tick duplicate steals, proposer to proposer auctions, and timing races driven by proof of availability latency. We develop a hazard normalized model of delay and inclusion, derive a closed form delay envelope \(M(τ)\), and characterize equilibria for censorship, duplication, and auction games. We show how deterministic priority DAG scheduling and duplicate aware payouts neutralize same tick MEV while preserving throughput, identifying simple protocol configurations to mitigate MCP specific extraction without centralized builders.
Smart contracts, the stateful programs running on blockchains, often rely on reports. Publishers are paid to publish these reports on the blockchain. Designing protocols that incentivize timely reporting is the prevalent reporting problem. But existing solutions face a security-performance trade-off: Relying on a small set of trusted publishers introduces centralization risks, while allowing open publication results in an excessive number of reports on the blockchain. We identify the root cause of this trade-off to be the standard symmetric reward design, which treats all reports equally. We prove that no symmetric-reward mechanism can overcome the trade-off. We present Personal Random Rewards for Reporting (Prrr), a protocol that assigns random heterogeneous values to reports. We call this novel mechanism-design concept Ex-Ante Synthetic Asymmetry. To the best of our knowledge, Prrr is the first game-theoretic mechanism (in any context) that deliberately forms participant asymmetry. Prrr employs a second-price-style settlement to allocate rewards, ensuring incentive compatibility and achieving both security and efficiency. Following the protocol constitutes a Subgame-Perfect Nash Equilibrium, robust against collusion and Sybil attacks. Prrr is applicable to numerous smart contracts that rely on timely reports.
The rising importance of cryptocurrencies as financial assets pushed their applicability from an object of speculation closer to standard financial instruments such as loans. In this work, we initiate the study of secure protocols that enable fiat-denominated loans collateralized by cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. We provide limited-custodial protocols for such loans relying only on trusted arbitration and provide their game-theoretical analysis. We also highlight various interesting directions for future research.
Optimistic responsiveness -- the ability of a consensus protocol to operate at the speed of the network -- is widely used in consensus protocol design to optimize latency and throughput. However, blockchain applications incentivize validators to play timing games by strategically delaying their proposals, since increased block time correlates with greater rewards. Consequently, it may appear that responsiveness (even under optimistic conditions) is impossible in blockchain protocols. In this work, we develop a model of timing games in responsive consensus protocols and find a prisoner's dilemma structure, where cooperation (proposing promptly) is in the validators' best interest, but individual incentives encourage validators to delay proposals selfishly. To attain desirable equilibria, we introduce dynamic block rewards that decrease with round time to explicitly incentivize faster proposals. Delays are measured through a voting mechanism, where other validators vote on the current leader's round time. By carefully setting the protocol parameters, the voting mechanism allows validators to coordinate and reach the cooperative equilibrium, benefiting all through a higher rate-of-reward. Thus, instead of responsiveness being an unattainable property due to timing games, we show that responsiveness itself can promote faster block proposals. One consequence of moving from a static to dynamic block reward is that validator utilities become more sensitive to latency, worsening the gap between the best- and worst-connected validators. Our analysis shows, however, that this effect is minor in both theoretical latency models and simulations based on real-world networks.
Despite the popularity of Hashed Time-Locked Contracts (HTLCs) because of their use in wide areas of applications such as payment channels, atomic swaps, etc, their use in exchange is still questionable. This is because of its incentive incompatibility and susceptibility to bribery attacks. State-of-the-art solutions such as MAD-HTLC (Oakland'21) and He-HTLC (NDSS'23) address this by leveraging miners' profit-driven behaviour to mitigate such attacks. The former is the mitigation against passive miners; however, the latter works against both active and passive miners. However, they consider only two bribing scenarios where either of the parties involved in the transfer collude with the miner. In this paper, we expose vulnerabilities in state-of-the-art solutions by presenting a miner-collusion bribery attack with implementation and game-theoretic analysis. Additionally, we propose a stronger attack on MAD-HTLC than He-HTLC, allowing the attacker to earn profits equivalent to attacking naive HTLC. Leveraging our insights, we propose \prot, a game-theoretically secure HTLC protocol resistant to all bribery scenarios. \prot\ employs a two-phase approach, preventing unauthorized token confiscation by third parties, such as miners. In Phase 1, parties commit to the transfer; in Phase 2, the transfer is executed without manipulation. We demonstrate \prot's efficiency in transaction cost and latency via implementations on Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Contract theory studies how a principal can incentivize agents to exert costly, unobservable effort through performance-based payments. While classical economic models provide elegant characterizations of optimal solutions, modern applications, ranging from online labor markets and healthcare to AI delegation and blockchain protocols, call for an algorithmic perspective. The challenge is no longer only which contracts induce desired behavior, but whether such contracts can be computed efficiently. This viewpoint has given rise to \emph{algorithmic contract design}, paralleling the rise of algorithmic mechanism design two decades ago. This article focuses on \emph{combinatorial contracts}, an emerging frontier within algorithmic contract design, where agents may choose among exponentially many combinations of actions, or where multiple agents must work together as a team, and the challenge lies in selecting the right composition. These models capture a wide variety of real-world contracting environments, from hospitals coordinating physicians across treatment protocols to firms hiring teams of engineers for interdependent tasks. We review three combinatorial settings: (i) a single agent choosing multiple actions, (ii) multiple agents with binary actions, and (iii) multiple agents each selecting multiple actions. For each, we highlight structural insights, algorithmic techniques, and complexity barriers. Results include tractable cases such as gross substitutes reward functions, hardness results, and approximation guarantees under value- and demand-oracle access. By charting these advances, the article maps the emerging landscape of combinatorial contract design, and highlights fundamental open questions and promising directions for future work.
Andrei Seoev, Leonid Gremyachikh, Anastasiia Smirnova, Yash Madhwal · 11 authors
In blockchain networks, the strategic ordering of transactions within blocks has emerged as a significant source of profit extraction, known as Maximal Extractable Value (MEV). The transition from spam-based Priority Gas Auctions to structured auction mechanisms like Polygon Atlas has transformed MEV extraction from public bidding wars into sealed-bid competitions under extreme time constraints. While this shift reduces network congestion, it introduces complex strategic challenges where searchers must make optimal bidding decisions within a sub-second window without knowledge of competitor behavior or presence. Traditional game-theoretic approaches struggle in this high-frequency, partially observable environment due to their reliance on complete information and static equilibrium assumptions. We present a reinforcement learning framework for MEV extraction on Polygon Atlas and make three contributions: (1) A novel simulation environment that accurately models the stochastic arrival of arbitrage opportunities and probabilistic competition in Atlas auctions; (2) A PPO-based bidding agent optimized for real-time constraints, capable of adaptive strategy formulation in continuous action spaces while maintaining production-ready inference speeds; (3) Empirical validation demonstrating our history-conditioned agent captures 49\% of available profits when deployed alongside existing searchers and 81\% when replacing the market leader, significantly outperforming static bidding strategies. Our work establishes that reinforcement learning provides a critical advantage in high-frequency MEV environments where traditional optimization methods fail, offering immediate value for industrial participants and protocol designers alike.
Maneesha Papireddygari, Xintong Wang, Bo Waggoner, David M. Pennock
Automated Market Makers (AMMs) are used to provide liquidity for combinatorial prediction markets that would otherwise be too thinly traded. They offer both buy and sell prices for any of the doubly exponential many possible securities that the market can offer. The problem of setting those prices is known to be #P-hard for the original and most well-known AMM, the logarithmic market scoring rule (LMSR) market maker [Chen et al., 2008]. We focus on another natural AMM, the Constant Log Utility Market Maker (CLUM). Unlike LMSR, whose worst-case loss bound grows with the number of outcomes, CLUM has constant worst-case loss, allowing the market to add outcomes on the fly and even operate over countably infinite many outcomes, among other features. Simpler versions of CLUM underpin several Decentralized Finance (DeFi) mechanisms including the Uniswap protocol that handles billions of dollars of cryptocurrency trades daily. We first establish the computational complexity of the problem: we prove that pricing securities is #P-hard for CLUM, via a reduction from the model counting 2-SAT problem. In order to make CLUM more practically viable, we propose an approximation algorithm for pricing securities that works with high probability. This algorithm assumes access to an oracle capable of determining the maximum shares purchased of any one outcome and the total number of outcomes that has that maximum amount purchased. We then show that this oracle can be implemented in polynomial time when restricted to interval securities, which are used in designing financial options.
Decentralized storage is one of the most natural applications built on blockchains and a central component of the Web3 ecosystem. Yet despite a decade of active development -- from IPFS and Filecoin to more recent entrants -- most of these storage protocols have received limited formal analysis of their incentive properties. Claims of incentive compatibility are sometimes made, but rarely proven. This gap matters: without well-designed incentives, a system may distribute storage but fail to truly decentralize it. We analyze Shelby -- a storage network protocol recently proposed by Aptos Labs and Jump Crypto -- and provide the first formal proof of its incentive properties. Our game-theoretic model shows that while off-chain audits alone collapse to universal shirking, Shelby's combination of peer audits with occasional on-chain verification yields incentive compatibility under natural parameter settings. We also examine coalition behavior and outline a simple modification that strengthens the protocol's collusion-resilience.
Transaction Fee Mechanisms (TFMs) study auction design in the Blockchain context, and emphasize robustness against miner and user collusion, moreso than traditional auction theory. \cite{chung2023foundations} introduce the notion of a mechanism being $c$-Side-Contract-Proof ($c$-SCP), i.e., robust to a collusion of the miner and $c$ users. Later work \cite{chung2024collusion,welfareIncreasingCollusion} shows a gap between the $1$-SCP and $2$-SCP classes. We show that the class of $2$-SCP mechanisms equals that of any $c$-SCP with $c\geq 2$, under a relatively minor assumption of consistent tie-breaking. In essence, this implies that any mechanism vulnerable to collusion, is also vulnerable to a small collusion.
Decentralized coordination and digital contracting are becoming critical in complex industrial ecosystems, yet existing approaches often rely on ad hoc heuristics or purely technical blockchain implementations without a rigorous economic foundation. This study develops a mechanism design framework for smart contract-based resource allocation that explicitly embeds efficiency and fairness in decentralized coordination. We establish the existence and uniqueness of contract equilibria, extending classical results in mechanism design, and introduce a decentralized price adjustment algorithm with provable convergence guarantees that can be implemented in real time. To evaluate performance, we combine extensive synthetic benchmarks with a proof-of-concept real-world dataset (MovieLens). The synthetic tests probe robustness under fee volatility, participation shocks, and dynamic demand, while the MovieLens case study illustrates how the mechanism can balance efficiency and fairness in realistic allocation environments. Results demonstrate that the proposed mechanism achieves substantial improvements in both efficiency and equity while remaining resilient to abrupt perturbations, confirming its stability beyond steady state analysis. The findings highlight broad managerial and policy relevance for supply chains, logistics, energy markets, healthcare resource allocation, and public infrastructure, where transparent and auditable coordination is increasingly critical. By combining theoretical rigor with empirical validation, the study shows how digital contracts can serve not only as technical artifacts but also as institutional instruments for transparency, accountability, and resilience in high-stakes resource allocation.
Bruno Mazorra, Burak Öz, Christoph Schlegel, Fei Wu
Ethereum's upcoming Glamsterdam upgrade introduces EIP-7732 enshrined Proposer--Builder Separation (ePBS), which improves the block production pipeline by addressing trust and scalability challenges. Yet it also creates a new liveness risk: builders gain a short-dated ``free'' option to prevent the execution payload they committed to from becoming canonical, without incurring an additional penalty. Exercising this option renders an empty block for the slot in question, thereby degrading network liveness. We present the first systematic study of the free option problem. Our theoretical results predict that option value and exercise probability grow with market volatility, the length of the option window, and the share of block value derived from external signals such as external market prices. The availability of a free option will lead to mispricing and LP losses. The problem would be exacerbated if Ethereum further scales and attracts more liquidity. Empirical estimates of values and exercise probabilities on historical blocks largely confirm our theoretical predictions. While the option is rarely profitable to exercise on average (0.82\% of blocks assuming an 8-second option time window), it becomes significant in volatile periods, reaching up to 6\% of blocks on high-volatility days -- precisely when users most require timely execution. Moreover, builders whose block value relies heavily on CEX-DEX arbitrage are more likely to exercise the option. We demonstrate that mitigation strategies -- shortening the option window or penalizing exercised options -- effectively reduce liveness risk.
Decentralization has an important geographic dimension that conventional metrics, such as stake distribution, often overlook. Where validators operate affects resilience to regional shocks (e.g., outages, natural disasters, or government intervention) as well as fairness in reward access. Yet major blockchain protocols do not encode geographical location in their rules; instead, validator locations emerge from a combination of economic incentives, regulatory constraints, infrastructure availability, and validator deployment choices. When certain locations offer systematic advantages, validators may strategically co-locate to maximize expected rewards, as observed in Ethereum, where validators cluster along the Atlantic corridor, which exhibits favorable latency. In this paper, we propose a formal model of validators' geographical positioning incentives under Ethereum's protocol design, capturing the interaction between its two block-building paradigms, local and external block building, and the geographical distribution of validators and information sources. We analytically characterize the model under a mean-field approximation and complement this analysis with an agent-based simulation calibrated with real-world latency data to quantify how these incentives translate into geographical concentration under heterogeneous geographic and infrastructural conditions. Our results show that Ethereum's block-building architecture is not geographically neutral. Both paradigms generate location-dependent payoffs and incentives to relocate closer to payoff-relevant parties in order to reduce propagation delays, although through different underlying mechanisms. Asymmetric access to information sources further amplifies geographical centralization. We also demonstrate that consensus parameters, such as attestation thresholds and slot times, modulate latency sensitivity and can amplify these effects, acting as protocol-level levers. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings for protocol design and outline potential mitigation directions informed by our analysis.
Decentralized data-feed systems enable blockchain-based smart contracts to access off-chain information by aggregating values from multiple oracles. To improve accuracy, these systems typically use an aggregation function, such as majority voting, to consolidate the inputs they receive from oracles and make a decision. Depending on the final decision and the values reported by the oracles, the participating oracles are compensated through shared rewards. However, such incentive mechanisms are vulnerable to mirroring attacks, where a single user controls multiple oracles to bias the decision of the aggregation function and maximize rewards. This paper analyzes the impact of mirroring attacks on the reliability and dependability of majority voting-based data-feed systems. We demonstrate how existing incentive mechanisms can unintentionally encourage rational users to implement such attacks. To address this, we propose a new incentive mechanism that discourages Sybil behavior. We prove that the proposed mechanism leads to a Nash Equilibrium in which each user operates only one oracle. Finally, we discuss the practical implementation of the proposed incentive mechanism and provide numerical examples to demonstrate its effectiveness.
Eyal Briman, Nimrod Talmon, Angela Kreitenweis, Muhammad Idrees
Abstract The Optimism Retroactive Project Funding (RetroPGF) is a key initiative within the blockchain ecosystem that retroactively rewards projects deemed valuable to the Ethereum and Optimism communities. Managed by the Optimism Collective, a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO), RetroPGF represents a large-scale experiment in decentralized governance. Funding rewards are distributed in OP tokens, the native digital currency of the ecosystem. As of this writing, four funding rounds have been completed, collectively allocating over $100M, with an additional $1.3B reserved for future rounds. However, we identify significant shortcomings in the current allocation system, underscoring the need for improved governance mechanisms given the scale of funds involved. Leveraging computational social choice techniques and insights from multiagent systems, we propose improvements to the voting process by recommending the adoption of a utilitarian moving phantoms mechanism [1]. This mechanism was originally introduced by Freeman et al. [1], is designed to enhance social welfare (using the $$\ell _1$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>ℓ</mml:mi> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:math> norm) while satisfying strategyproofness–two key properties aligned with the application’s governance requirements. Our analysis provides a formal framework for designing improved funding mechanisms for DAOs, contributing to the broader discourse on decentralized governance and public goods allocation.
Bernhard Kauer, Aleksandr Petrosyan, Benjamin Livshits
The fundamental basis for maintaining integrity within contemporary blockchain systems is provided by authenticated databases. Our analysis indicates that a significant portion of the approaches applied in this domain fail to sufficiently meet the stringent requirements of systems processing transactions at rates of multi-million TPS. AlDBaran signifies a substantial advancement in authenticated databases. By eliminating disk I/O operations from the critical path, implementing prefetching strategies, and refining the update mechanism of the Merkle tree, we have engineered an authenticated data structure capable of handling state updates efficiently at a network throughput of 50 Gbps. This throughput capacity significantly surpasses any empirically documented blockchain throughput, guaranteeing the ability of even the most high-throughput blockchains to generate state commitments effectively. AlDBaran provides support for historical state proofs, which facilitates a wide array of novel applications. For instance, the deployment of AlDBaran could enable blockchains that do not currently support state commitments to offer functionalities for light clients and/or implement rollups. When benchmarked against alternative authenticated data structure projects, AlDBaran exhibits superior performance and simplicity. In particular, AlDBaran achieves speeds of approximately 48 million updates per second using an identical machine configuration. This characteristic renders AlDBaran an attractive solution for resource-limited environments, as its historical data capabilities can be modularly isolated (and deactivated), which further enhances performance. On consumer-level portable hardware, it achieves approximately 8 million updates/s in an in-memory setting and 5 million updates/s with snapshots at sub-second intervals, illustrating compelling and cost-effective scalability.
Mobile edge computing (MEC) is a promising technology that enhances the efficiency of mobile blockchain networks, by enabling miners, often acted by mobile users (MUs) with limited computing resources, to offload resource-intensive mining tasks to nearby edge computing servers. Collaborative block mining can further boost mining efficiency by allowing multiple miners to form coalitions, pooling their computing resources and transaction data together to mine new blocks collaboratively. Therefore, an MEC-assisted collaborative blockchain network can leverage the strengths of both technologies, offering improved efficiency, security, and scalability for blockchain systems. While existing research in this area has mainly focused on the single-coalition collaboration mode, where each miner can only join one coalition, this work explores a more comprehensive multi-coalition collaboration mode, which allows each miner to join multiple coalitions. To analyze the behavior of miners and the edge computing service provider (ECP) in this scenario, we propose a novel two-stage Stackelberg game. In Stage I, the ECP, as the leader, determines the prices of computing resources for all MUs. In Stage II, each MU decides the coalitions to join, resulting in an overlapping coalition formation (OCF) game; Subsequently, each coalition decides how many edge computing resources to purchase from the ECP, leading to an edge resource competition (ERC) game. We derive the closed-form Nash equilibrium for the ERC game, based on which we further propose an OCF-based alternating algorithm to achieve a stable coalition structure for the OCF game and develop a near-optimal pricing strategy for the ECP's resource pricing problem.
Maria Alejandra Ramirez, Rosemarie Nagel, David Wolpert, Jürgen Jost
Commitments play a crucial role in game theory, shaping strategic interactions by either altering a player's own payoffs or influencing the incentives of others through outcome-contingent payments. While most research has focused on using commitments to achieve efficient equilibria, their potential applications beyond this goal remain largely unexplored. In this study, we introduce a non-coercive extortion mechanism that leverages commitments to outcome-contingent payments, demonstrating how a player or external agent can extract profit by offering rewards rather than threatening punishment. At the core of the mechanism is the introduction of sequentiality into a simultaneous-move game, fundamentally reshaping the strategic interaction. We derive the conditions under which extortion is successful, identify the class of games susceptible to this scheme, and determine both the maximum extractable profit and the minimum required payment. To illustrate the extortion mechanism, we apply it to 2x2 games, highlighting how even simple strategic settings can be vulnerable to this form of manipulation. Our results reveal strategic vulnerabilities in competitive settings, with significant implications for economic markets, diplomatic relations, and multi-agent systems operating in blockchain environments. This work broadens our understanding of commitments in game theory and raises critical questions about how to safeguard strategic interactions from exploitation through non-coercive extortion.
We introduce the first complete formal solution to corrigibility in the off-switch game, with provable guarantees in multi-step, partially observed environments. Our framework consists of five *structurally separate* utility heads -- deference, switch-access preservation, truthfulness, low-impact behavior via a belief-based extension of Attainable Utility Preservation, and bounded task reward -- combined lexicographically by strict weight gaps. Theorem 1 proves exact single-round corrigibility in the partially observable off-switch game; Theorem 3 extends the guarantee to multi-step, self-spawning agents, showing that even if each head is *learned* to mean-squared error $\varepsilon$ and the planner is $\varepsilon$-sub-optimal, the probability of violating *any* safety property is bounded while still ensuring net human benefit. In contrast to Constitutional AI or RLHF/RLAIF, which merge all norms into one learned scalar, our separation makes obedience and impact-limits provably dominate even when incentives conflict. For settings where adversaries can modify the agent, we prove that deciding whether an arbitrary post-hack agent will ever violate corrigibility is undecidable by reduction to the halting problem, then carve out a finite-horizon "decidable island" where safety can be certified in randomized polynomial time and verified with privacy-preserving, constant-round zero-knowledge proofs.
We consider the online algorithmic challenge that is faced by blockchains that have multidimensional block constraints and serve quasi-patient bidders. We first provide online approximation algorithms for the important special cases of small transactions or a small number of dimensions; this solves open problems left by [Babaioff and Nisan, EC 2025]. Second, we study multidimensional variants of Ethereum's EIP-1559 protocol. We show that if the block builders manage to approximately optimize each block's welfare myopically, then an approximation to the global offline optimal welfare is obtained. On the other hand, we show that, unlike in the single-dimensional case, EIP-1559 by itself does not guarantee any good approximation.
Lucas Barbosa, Sam Kirshner, Rob Kopel, Eric Tze Kuan Lim · 5 authors
This paper outlines an incentive-driven and decentralized approach to verifying the veracity of digital content at scale. Widespread misinformation, an explosion in AI-generated content and reduced reliance on traditional news sources demands a new approach for content authenticity and truth-seeking that is fit for a modern, digital world. By using smart contracts and digital identity to incorporate 'trust' into the reward function for published content, not just engagement, we believe that it could be possible to foster a self-propelling paradigm shift to combat misinformation through a community-based governance model. The approach described in this paper requires that content creators stake financial collateral on factual claims for an impartial jury to vet with a financial reward for contribution. We hypothesize that with the right financial and social incentive model users will be motivated to participate in crowdsourced fact-checking and content creators will place more care in their attestations. This is an exploratory paper and there are a number of open issues and questions that warrant further analysis and exploration.