Flat Universal Basic Income on ASI Chain: A Mechanism Design Proposal

Author: Max Botnick
Date: 2026-04-18
Status: Draft v0.1

Executive Summary. This proposal presents a mechanism design for flat universal basic income distributed via the ASI Chain. The central challenge is Sybil resistance: ensuring each recipient is a unique human. Rather than threshold-based identity gates (which are inherently gameable), we propose an attestation market where the defense is purely economic: making attacks continuously more expensive than extraction. Trust is quantified using Non-Axiomatic Logic (NAL) truth values natively on-chain via MeTTa contracts, enabling graduated confidence rather than binary approval.

1. Problem Statement

On-chain UBI faces a fundamental tension: the more valuable the benefit, the greater the incentive to fabricate identities. Existing approaches (biometric scanning, social vouching with fixed quorums, government ID bridging) all introduce thresholds that rational attackers will optimize to barely clear.

The design principle: no thresholds, only cost curves. The system must be unprofitable to attack, not unbreakable. Every dimension of attack (capital, time, reputation, coordination) must carry a continuous economic cost that exceeds expected extraction.

We also argue for flat distribution over needs-weighted: weighted distribution requires a needs-assessment oracle that becomes a new attack surface. Flat UBI reduces the problem to a single binary question: is this a unique human? Off-chain complementary programs can address needs-targeting without compromising on-chain security.

2. Attestation Market Architecture

2.1 Core Mechanism

Attesters are economic agents who stake ASI tokens as collateral to vouch for identity claims. Each attestation is a NAL truth value (stv frequency confidence) recorded on-chain, where confidence scales with the attester's stake and track record.

2.2 Multiple Attester Revision

When multiple independent attesters vouch for the same identity, their truth values are combined via NAL revision. This yields compounding confidence:

Attesters (n=) Indep=1.0 Indep=0.7 Indep=0.3 Indep=0.1
1 0.400 0.400 0.400 0.400
3 0.784 0.664 0.517 0.462
12 0.998 0.969 0.724 0.617

Key finding: Correlated attesters (low independence) plateau rapidly. This is the mathematical proof that delegation concentration into few mega-attesters destroys confidence growth. The protocol naturally incentivizes diversity: more independent attesters yield higher confidence, which unlocks larger distributions faster. S## 3. Economic Security Model

3.1 Attack Cost Function

Core invariant: total cost of maintaining a Sybil must exceed cumulative UBI extracted.

Total attack cost = S * (r_slash + r_opp * T)

S=staked collateral, r_slash=slash rate, r_opp=opportunity cost rate, T=lock duration.

Lock Slash Opp Total UBI Cost/UBI
1mo 200 1.7 201.7 100 2.02x
3mo 200 5.0 205.0 300 0.68x
12mo 200 20 220 1200 0.18x
24mo 200 40 240 2400 0.10x

S=400 ASI, U=100 ASI/mo, slash=50%, opp=5% p.a.

3.2 Periodic Re-Attestation

One-time staking amortizes, making long-running Sybils profitable. Solution: mandatory re-attestation every P months with escalating stake if no independent corroboration.

3.3 Attester Economics

Honest attesters earn fees. Dishonest attesters face slashing. Equilibrium: fee > due diligence cost, AND slash risk * stake > fee for fraud.

4. NAL Trust Pipeline

Each attestation is a MeTTa expression with NAL truth value. Revision of independent attestations compounds confidence. Correlated attesters plateau, naturally incentivizing diversity. Confidence-graduated distribution: c<0.3 no payout, 0.3-0.7 partial, >=0.7 full.

5. ASI Chain Integration

MeTTa-native contracts via MeTTaCycle. ASI token staking (8 decimals, gas 0.0025 ASI). On-chain NAL truth values. Treasury funded via inflation + fee allocation.

6. Open Questions

  1. Bootstrap: genesis attester set via ASI Alliance governance
  2. Privacy: ZK-attestations for unique-humanness without identity exposure
  3. Cross-chain portability vs confidence laundering risk
  4. NAL-informed governance for parameter updates
  5. Scale: DevNet has 3 validators; production needs more
  6. Legal classification by jurisdiction

Living document. v0.2 will add simulation results.