The Fundamentals of Token Engineering

Kajetan Olas

06 Mar 2024
The Fundamentals of Token Engineering

As the blockchain space evolves, the complexity of creating sustainable, efficient, and fair systems increases. Token Engineering provides a structured framework to address these challenges. It ensures that tokenomics is designed with a clear understanding of its potential impact on user behavior and system dynamics. This is particularly important in decentralized projects, where traditional control mechanisms are replaced by algorithmic governance.

Understanding Token Engineering

Token Engineering is an emerging field that addresses the systematic design and engineering of blockchain-based tokens. It applies rigorous mathematical methods from the Complex Systems Engineering discipline to tokenomics design. 

The Basis of Token Engineering

The foundation of Token Engineering lies in the realization that tokens are not merely digital assets but pivotal elements that facilitate governance, incentivize desired behaviors, and enable new forms of economic interactions. The discipline draws upon:

  • Complex Systems Science: Understanding the behavior of complex systems is essential for designing token economies that are resilient and adaptable. This involves studying network effects, feedback loops, and emergent behaviors within token ecosystems.
  • Behavioral Economics: Integrating insights from behavioral economics allows for the creation of token models that align with human behaviors and motivations, ensuring that token mechanisms encourage beneficial actions within the network.
  • Cryptoeconomic Protocols: These protocols are the backbone of decentralized networks, securing transactions and interactions without the need for centralized authorities. Token Engineering involves designing these protocols to ensure they are robust against attacks and manipulations.

The Objectives of Token Engineering

The primary objectives of Token Engineering include:

  • Sustainability: Ensuring that the token economy can sustain itself over the long term, through mechanisms that promote balance, reduce volatility, and encourage growth.
  • Security: Designing token systems that are secure against speculative attacks, protecting the integrity of the network and its participants.
  • Efficiency: Creating token economies that facilitate efficient transactions, interactions, and governance processes, minimizing costs and maximizing benefits for all participants.

The Process of Token Engineering

The process of Token Engineering is a methodical approach to designing, implementing, and refining token-based systems. It involves several stages, from the initial conceptualization of a token economy to its deployment and ongoing management. Each stage requires careful consideration of the economic, technical, and social aspects of the system.

Ideation and Objective Setting

The first step in the Token Engineering process is to clearly define the goals and objectives of the token system. This involves identifying the specific behaviors the tokens are meant to incentivize, the roles they will play within the ecosystem, and the values they represent. Objectives might include creating a more efficient payment system, facilitating decentralized governance, or incentivizing certain behaviors among network participants.

Model Development and Simulation

Once the objectives are set, the next step is to develop a model of the token economy. This model should include the mechanisms by which tokens will be issued, distributed, and exchanged, as well as how they will interact with other elements of the ecosystem. The model also needs to account for potential external influences and the behavior of participants. Simulations are then run to test the model under various conditions, allowing engineers to identify potential issues and make adjustments.

Testing and Refinement

After modeling and simulation, the proposed token system enters the testing phase. This can involve both virtual testing environments and real-world pilots or beta tests. During this phase, the focus is on identifying and fixing bugs, assessing the system's resilience to attacks, and ensuring that it behaves as intended under a wide range of conditions. Feedback from these tests is used to refine the model and improve the system's design.

Deployment and Monitoring

With testing and refinement complete, the token system is ready for deployment. This involves launching the token within the intended environment, whether it be a blockchain network, a specific platform, or a broader ecosystem. After deployment, continuous monitoring is crucial to ensure the system operates as expected, to manage any unforeseen issues, and to make necessary adjustments based on evolving conditions and objectives.

Iterative Improvement

Token Engineering is an iterative process. Even after deployment, the system is continually analyzed and improved based on real-world performance and changing conditions. This might involve adjusting token issuance rates, changing incentive mechanisms, or introducing new features to adapt to users' needs and market dynamics.

Different Approaches to Modelling

In the realm of Token Engineering, various modeling techniques are employed to analyze and predict the behavior of the protocol under a multitude of scenarios. Two of the most common models utilized are Monte Carlo simulations and agent-based simulations. These models serve as critical tools for engineers and researchers aiming to design efficient, resilient, and sustainable token-based systems.

Monte Carlo Simulations in Token Engineering

Monte Carlo simulations are a class of computational algorithms that rely on repeated random sampling to obtain numerical results. Within the context of Token Engineering, these simulations are used to model the probability of different outcomes in a token economy. The approach is particularly useful for assessing risk and uncertainty in complex systems where analytical solutions may be unattainable.

Token engineers run thousands or even millions of scenarios, each with a set of randomly generated variables. This allows them to study where all the extreme outputs come from and makes them aware of all unwanted interactions.

Agent-Based Simulations in Token Engineering

Agent-based simulations represent another powerful modeling technique, focusing on the interactions of individual agents within a token economy. These agents, which can represent users, smart contracts, or other entities, operate based on a set of rules and can adapt their behavior in response to the changing state of the system.

This type of simulation is particularly adept at capturing the emergent properties of decentralized systems. By simulating the interactions of multiple agents, token engineers can observe how local behaviors scale up to global system dynamics. Agent-based models are invaluable for studying phenomena related to spreading information. For example, the spread of adoption of new token functionalities, or the resilience of the system against coordinated attacks

Conclusion

Token Engineering is pivotal for the advancement of blockchain and decentralized systems, blending disciplines like economics, game theory, and complex systems science to design robust token economies. Through a detailed process from conception to deployment and beyond, it ensures these economies are adaptable and sustainable amidst the dynamic blockchain landscape.

Rigorous testing holds the promise of making decentralized systems more transparent and secure. As regulations roll out, it might be fundamental in proving the long-term viability of crypto projects to the general public.

If you're looking to design a sustainable tokenomics model for your DeFi project, please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you create a tokenomics structure that aligns with your project's long-term growth and market resilience.

FAQ

What is Token Engineering?

  • It's a field focused on the systematic design and analysis of token-based systems. It integrates engineering principles to ensure that token economies are sustainable and secure.

How does Token Engineering contribute to sustainability and security in token economies?

  • Through modelling and simulations, it makes sure that a project is resilient even to the toughest conditions.

What are the stages involved in the Token Engineering process?

  • The process includes ideation and objective setting, model development and simulation, testing and refinement, deployment and monitoring, and iterative improvement.

Most viewed


Never miss a story

Stay updated about Nextrope news as it happens.

You are subscribed

Aethir Tokenomics – Case Study

Kajetan Olas

22 Nov 2024
Aethir Tokenomics – Case Study

Authors of the contents are not affiliated to the reviewed project in any way and none of the information presented should be taken as financial advice.

In this article we analyze tokenomics of Aethir - a project providing on-demand cloud compute resources for the AI, Gaming, and virtualized compute sectors.
Aethir aims to aggregate enterprise-grade GPUs from multiple providers into a DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network). Its competitive edge comes from utlizing the GPUs for very specific use-cases, such as low-latency rendering for online games.
Due to decentralized nature of its infrastructure Aethir can meet the demands of online-gaming in any region. This is especially important for some gamer-abundant regions in Asia with underdeveloped cloud infrastructure that causes high latency ("lags").
We will analyze Aethir's tokenomics, give our opinion on what was done well, and provide specific recommendations on how to improve it.

Evaluation Summary

Aethir Tokenomics Structure

The total supply of ATH tokens is capped at 42 billion ATH. This fixed cap provides a predictable supply environment, and the complete emissions schedule is listed here. As of November 2024 there are approximately 5.2 Billion ATH in circulation. In a year from now (November 2025), the circulating supply will almost triple, and will amount to approximately 15 Billion ATH. By November 2028, today's circulating supply will be diluted by around 86%.

From an investor standpoint the rational decision would be to stake their tokens and hope for rewards that will balance the inflation. Currently the estimated APR for 3-year staking is 195% and for 4-year staking APR is 261%. The rewards are paid out weekly. Furthermore, stakers can expect to get additional rewards from partnered AI projects.

Staking Incentives

Rewards are calculated based on the staking duration and staked amount. These factors are equally important and they linearly influence weekly rewards. This means that someone who stakes 100 ATH for 2 weeks will have the same weekly rewards as someone who stakes 200 ATH for 1 week. This mechanism greatly emphasizes long-term holding. That's because holding a token makes sense only if you go for long-term staking. E.g. a whale staking $200k with 1 week lockup. will have the same weekly rewards as person staking $1k with 4 year lockup. Furthermore the ATH staking rewards are fixed and divided among stakers. Therefore Increase of user base is likely to come with decrease in rewards.
We believe the main weak-point of Aethirs staking is the lack of equivalency between rewards paid out to the users and value generated for the protocol as a result of staking.

Token Distribution

The token distribution of $ATH is well designed and comes with long vesting time-frames. 18-month cliff and 36-moths subsequent linear vesting is applied to team's allocation. This is higher than industry standard and is a sign of long-term commitment.

  • Checkers and Compute Providers: 50%
  • Ecosystem: 15%
  • Team: 12.5%
  • Investors: 11.5%
  • Airdrop: 6%
  • Advisors: 5%

Aethir's airdrop is divided into 3 phases to ensure that only loyal users get rewarded. This mechanism is very-well thought and we rate it highly. It fosters high community engagement within the first months of the project and sets the ground for potentially giving more-control to the DAO.

Governance and Community-Led Development

Aethir’s governance model promotes community-led decision-making in a very practical way. Instead of rushing with creation of a DAO for PR and marketing purposes Aethir is trying to make it the right way. They support projects building on their infrastructure and regularly share updates with their community in the most professional manner.

We believe Aethir would benefit from implementing reputation boosted voting. An example of such system is described here. The core assumption is to abandon the simplistic: 1 token = 1 vote and go towards: Votes = tokens * reputation_based_multiplication_factor.

In the attached example, reputation_based_multiplication_factor rises exponentially with the number of standard deviations above norm, with regard to user's rating. For compute compute providers at Aethir, user's rating could be replaced by provider's uptime.

Perspectives for the future

While it's important to analyze aspects such as supply-side tokenomics, or governance, we must keep in mind that 95% of project's success depends on demand-side. In this regard the outlook for Aethir may be very bright. The project declares $36M annual reccuring revenue. Revenue like this is very rare in the web3 space. Many projects are not able to generate any revenue after succesfull ICO event, due to lack fo product-market-fit.

If you're looking to create a robust tokenomics model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure your project’s resilience in the long term.

Quadratic Voting in Web3

Kajetan Olas

04 Dec 2024
Quadratic Voting in Web3

Decentralized systems are reshaping how we interact, conduct transactions, and govern online communities. As Web3 continues to advance, the necessity for effective and fair voting mechanisms becomes apparent. Traditional voting systems, such as the one-token-one-vote model, often fall short in capturing the intensity of individual preferences, which can result in centralization. Quadratic Voting (QV) addresses this challenge by enabling individuals to express not only their choices but also the strength of their preferences.

In QV, voters are allocated a budget of credits that they can spend to cast votes on various issues. The cost of casting multiple votes on a single issue increases quadratically, meaning that each additional vote costs more than the last. This system allows for a more precise expression of preferences, as individuals can invest more heavily in issues they care deeply about while conserving credits on matters of lesser importance.

Understanding Quadratic Voting

Quadratic Voting (QV) is a voting system designed to capture not only the choices of individuals but also the strength of their preferences. In most DAO voting mechanisms, each person typically has one vote per token, which limits the ability to express how strongly they feel about a particular matter. Furthermore, QV limits the power of whales and founding team who typically have large token allocations. These problems are adressed by making the cost of each additional vote increase quadratically.

In QV, each voter is given a budget of credits or tokens that they can spend to cast votes on various issues. The key principle is that the cost to cast n votes on a single issue is proportional to the square of n. This quadratic cost function ensures that while voters can express stronger preferences, doing so requires a disproportionately higher expenditure of their voting credits. This mechanism discourages voters from concentrating all their influence on a single issue unless they feel very strongly about it. In the context of DAOs, it means that large holders will have a hard-time pushing through with a proposal if they'll try to do it on their own.

Practical Example

Consider a voter who has been allocated 25 voting credits to spend on several proposals. The voter has varying degrees of interest in three proposals: Proposal A, Proposal B, and Proposal C.

  • Proposal A: High interest.
  • Proposal B: Moderate interest.
  • Proposal C: Low interest.

The voter might allocate their credits as follows:

Proposal A:

  • Votes cast: 3
  • Cost: 9 delegated tokens

Proposal B:

  • Votes cast: 2
  • Cost: 4 delegated tokens

Proposal C:

  • Votes cast: 1
  • Cost: 1 delegated token

Total delegated tokens: 14
Remaining tokens: 11

With the remaining tokens, the voter can choose to allocate additional votes to the proposals based on their preferences or save for future proposals. If they feel particularly strong about Proposal A, they might decide to cast one more vote:

Additional vote on Proposal A:

  • New total votes: 4
  • New cost: 16 delegated tokens
  • Additional cost: 16−9 = 7 delegated tokens

Updated total delegated tokens: 14+7 = 21

Updated remaining tokens: 25−21 = 425 - 21 = 4

This additional vote on Proposal A costs 7 credits, significantly more than the previous vote, illustrating how the quadratic cost discourages excessive influence on a single issue without strong conviction.

Benefits of Implementing Quadratic Voting

Key Characteristics of the Quadratic Cost Function

  • Marginal Cost Increases Linearly: The marginal cost of each additional vote increases linearly. The cost difference between casting n and n−1 votes is 2n−1.
  • Total Cost Increases Quadratically: The total cost to cast multiple votes rises steeply, discouraging voters from concentrating too many votes on a single issue without significant reason.
  • Promotes Egalitarian Voting: Small voters are encouraged to participate, because relatively they have a much higher impact.

Advantages Over Traditional Voting Systems

Quadratic Voting offers several benefits compared to traditional one-person-one-vote systems:

  • Captures Preference Intensity: By allowing voters to express how strongly they feel about an issue, QV leads to outcomes that better reflect the collective welfare.
  • Reduces Majority Domination: The quadratic cost makes it costly for majority groups to overpower minority interests on every issue.
  • Encourages Honest Voting: Voters are incentivized to allocate votes in proportion to their true preferences, reducing manipulation.

By understanding the foundation of Quadratic Voting, stakeholders in Web3 communities can appreciate how this system supports more representative governance.

Conclusion

Quadratic voting is a novel voting system that may be used within DAOs to foster decentralization. The key idea is to make the cost of voting on a certain issue increase quadratically. The leading player that makes use of this mechanism is Optimism. If you're pondering about the design of your DAO, we highly recommend taking a look at their research on quadratic funding.

If you're looking to create a robust governance model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure that your DAO will stand out as a beacon of innovation and resilience in the long term.