Validator income: separate protocol (i.e., network) fees from DIN issuance, stop calling both "rewards", and keep DIN for staking
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
@umermjd11 y travaille déjà.
Depuis le 13/11/2026.
Évaluation
Cette issue n'a pas encore été évaluée.
Description
Decision
Validator income comes from two clearly separate sources:
- Protocol fees. Model owners pay for training rounds, and validators who did the work share them. Fees are paid in the native currency of the chain the protocol runs on (ETH on Optimism). While we're testing, a stablecoin may be used instead.
- DIN issuance. New DIN created on a fixed schedule over set periods, going to staked validators according to their measured, ongoing contribution, and added to their stake (similar to ETH issuance to Ethereum validators).
Separately:
- Gas is paid in the chain's native currency to the chain itself. It is not protocol income.
- Slashing is a penalty on stake for misbehaviour. It doesn't decide who receives fees or issuance.
- DIN (INZ after #281) is the staking token. It enters circulation through issuance, not as a payment for individual batches.
This builds on #283 (data owners: no rewards at launch, stablecoin if ever).
Language: why "rewards" is a problem
Today the code and docs use "rewards" for everything a validator receives (giRewardPool, claimReward, aggregatorWeight as a "reward weight", RewardEngine). That causes confusion in three ways:
- It blurs two different things: fees, which are paid by users for work done, and issuance, which is new DIN created by the protocol on a schedule.
- It suggests validators are paid in DIN for each batch, when DIN is meant to be the staking token.
- To outsiders it can read as a promised return or yield, which is not what either source is.
Proposed terms for code, docs and conversation:
| Use | Meaning | Avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Fees (protocol fees) | What model owners pay for a training round, shared among validators who did the work | "rewards" |
| Issuance | New DIN created on a set schedule, paid to stake by measured contribution | "rewards", "emission rewards" |
| Contribution | The measured work a validator did (e.g. revealing in a finalized batch, #335) | "reward weight" |
| Gas | Transaction costs paid to the chain in its native currency | "fees" when we mean gas |
| Slashing | A penalty on stake for misbehaviour | — |
"Rewards" should only be used, if at all, as a general word covering both fees and issuance, never for one of them on its own.
Where the code differs today (develop)
- Model owners fund each GI's reward pool in DIN (
DINTaskAuditor.depositRewards), and a GI can't start until it's funded (validateGIStart). DinEmissionmints DIN per GI, per model, on a decay schedule, and deposits it into that pool.- The pool is split by
aggregatorWeight(#335 now counts only aggregators who revealed). DinFeeRoutercollects fees in DIN.- Dispute bonds are posted in DIN.
Questions to settle
- Fees: switch fee payments and validator fee shares to the chain's native currency (ETH on Optimism), with the option of a stablecoin while testing? Should the fee currency be set per deployment, so the same code works on any chain?
- Issuance: move from per-GI, per-model emission into a reward pool to a network-wide schedule over fixed periods, paid to stake by measured contribution?
- Contribution: what counts? For aggregators, revealing in a finalized batch (#335). What about auditors, uptime and consistency over time?
- Renaming: which names change in code and docs, e.g. giRewardPool, claimReward, aggregatorWeight, RewardEngine, and when (before the DevNet 2.0 deploy, alongside the #281 rename, or later)?
- Dispute bonds: keep them in DIN (like stake), or move them to the chain's native currency?
- Does any of this block the DevNet 2.0 deploy (#284), or can it follow?
@umeradl, could you scope this and say which parts block DevNet 2.0?
- Langage dominant
- Python
- Étoiles
- 4
- Forks
- 7
- Merge moyen
- 5 j 15 h
- PR mergées (30 j)
- 43
Préparer son environnement
Ce projet ne fournit ni conteneur de développement, ni Dockerfile, ni guide de contribution : l'installation est à votre charge. Commencez par son README, et consultez notre guide de la première contribution pour les étapes générales.
Par où commencer
- Lisez l'issue en entier, puis le guide de contribution du projet.
- Signalez en commentaire que vous la prenez — cela évite que deux personnes fassent le même travail.
- Forkez le dépôt et travaillez sur une branche.
- Ouvrez une pull request qui référence le numéro de l'issue.
Autres issues de InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet
-
Difficulté 2/5 1-3 heures Accessibilité débutants 70/100
InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet#344 ·
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
-
Update the 25 translated organisation READMEs to match the English versionPeut-être pris @mrCabez l’a pris il y a 15 jours. Ouvertegood first issue help wanted
Difficulté 2/5 1-3 heures Accessibilité débutants 76/100
InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet#277 · 3 commentaires · 1 personne assignée ·
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
-
Make reference auditors honor `audit_scoring_policy` in the manifestPeut-être pris @0xzoz l’a pris il y a 2 jours. OuverteApproved
Difficulté 4/5 3-5 jours Accessibilité débutants 54/100
InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet#330 · 4 commentaires ·
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
-
Serialize only assigned audit examples, not the full parent datasetPeut-être pris @0xzoz l’a pris il y a 2 jours. OuverteApproved
Difficulté 4/5 3-5 jours Accessibilité débutants 48/100
InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet#329 · 4 commentaires ·
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
-
Remove plaintext audit dataset keys from model-owner CLI outputPeut-être pris @0xzoz l’a pris il y a 2 jours. OuverteApproved
Difficulté 4/5 3-5 jours Accessibilité débutants 58/100
InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet#328 · 5 commentaires ·
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
Toutes les issues de InfiniteZeroFoundation/DevNet
Issues similaires
-
Difficulté 1/5 Moins d'une heure Accessibilité débutants 85/100
-
Difficulté 2/5 1-3 heures Accessibilité débutants 62/100
OCA/account-invoicing#2529 ·
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
-
area/ci
Difficulté 1/5 Moins d'une heure Accessibilité débutants 62/100
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
-
ImageGen generate-batch aborts valid JSONL jobs containing a Unicode line separator in poster textOuvertebug imagen skills
Difficulté 2/5 1-3 heures Accessibilité débutants 78/100
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour
-
Email validation accepts a trailing newlinePeut-être pris @marcello-pichini l’a pris aujourd’hui. Ouverte
Difficulté 2/5 1-3 heures Accessibilité débutants 78/100
Les mainteneurs répondent en général sous 1 jour