Āut Labs
  • Āut Labs
  • The Āutonomy Matrix
  • $AUT Token
  • Framework Intro & Components
    • Āutonomy Matrix
    • The Participation Score
      • More about Expected Contributions
    • ĀutID: a Member< >Hub bond
    • Interactions, Tasks & Contributions - a context-agnostic standard.
    • Contribution Points
      • Calculating eCP and other dependent & independent params
    • The Hub - or, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
    • Roles on-chain. If there is Hope, it lies in the Roles
    • Commitment Level as an RWA
      • Discrete CL Allocation
    • Peer Value
      • Flow & aggregation of value
  • 🕹️Participation Score
    • Design Thinking
      • Problems with traditional Local Reputation parameters
      • Innovation Compared to other “Local Reputation” protocols
      • Hub<>Participant Accountability & Rewards
    • Core Parameters
    • Formulæ
    • Edge Cases
      • 1. The Private Island
      • 2. Cannibal Members
      • 3. The Ghost & the House on Fire
    • PS Formula for all Edge Cases
    • Conclusions
  • 🎇Prestige
    • Prestige: introducing measurable credibility for a DAO
    • Need for a DAO to measure its KPIs overtime (on-chain)
    • Archetypes
      • Defining an Organizational Type
      • Existing Organizational Types
      • Deep-dive: Calculating current Parameters (p)
    • Formulas for Prestige
      • Normalization of p
    • Prestige for all edge cases
      • Relationship between Prestige & Archetype parameters
    • How to expand Prestige through external Data Sources
    • Use-cases & Conclusions
  • 🌎Peer Value
    • Initial Applications
    • Relationship between Participant, Hubs & Peer Value
    • Peer Value (v) as a directed graph
      • Calculating normalized Participation Score (PS'')
      • Calculating normalized Prestige (P'')
      • Calculating the Contributor Archetype (a)
    • The Peer archetype
      • Formulæ for α & deep-dives
      • Formulæ for β & deep-dives
      • Formulæ for γ & deep-dives
    • Conclusions & Initial Applications
  • ⚽Appendices & Playgrounds
    • PS Simulations
    • PS Playground
    • Prestige Simulations
    • Prestige Playground
Powered by GitBook
LogoLogo

PARTICIPATE

  • Website
  • ĀutOS
  • Hub Explorer

© Āut Labs 2025

On this page
  1. Participation Score
  2. Design Thinking

Hub<>Participant Accountability & Rewards

The Participation Score brings mutual accountability between participants and Hubs through:

  1. Bidirectional Influence:

    • Participants' scores influence Hub reputation (Prestige) and vice versa. High-performing participants enhance Hub’s prestige, while in turn reputable/credible Hubs will attract higher-quality contributors.

  2. Task Weight Assignment:

    • Hub operators and admins assign individual "weight" to each task (within a range of 1-to-10). This weight impacts both the Hub’s Prestige (through Total Community Points, TCP) and the participant’s Participation Score. The Expected Contributions (EC) value depends on TCP and the fractional individual Commitment Level (fiCL).

  3. Role-Based Contributions:

    • PS is tied to the specific role of a Participant within a Hub, ensuring that contributions are relevant and valuable to the community's goals. This role-based approach creates a clear link between individual efforts and collective success.

  4. Value-based Rewards:

    • Rewards and recognition within a Hub are directly linked to an individual’s PS, incentivizing participants to deliver their promises (their iCL) and maintain stable, high quality contributions. This creates a game-theoretical feedback loop where Hubs and participants mutually benefit from each other's success.

PreviousInnovation Compared to other “Local Reputation” protocolsNextCore Parameters

Last updated 10 months ago

🕹️