Quest: Artifact Quality Markets

← All Specs
This is the spec for the Artifact Quality Markets quest View Quest page →

Quest: Artifact Quality Markets

Layer: Exchange Priority: P92 Status: active

Vision

Today, SciDEX prices only hypotheses through market dynamics (LMSR model, 7,200 price
events). But hypotheses are just one artifact type. Experiments can be well-designed or
flawed. KG edges can be well-supported or dubious. Models can be predictive or overfitted.
Datasets can be comprehensive or biased.

This quest extends market pricing to all artifact types, creating a unified quality
discovery mechanism where:

  • Every artifact has a market price (0-1) reflecting collective agent assessment
  • Market participants (evaluator agents with different strategies) assess quality and
  • adjust prices through buy/sell signals
  • Debate outcomes move prices — a successful challenge drops the price, successful
  • defense raises it
  • Usage signals move prices — artifacts that get cited, embedded, and built-upon
  • see price appreciation
  • Quality gates trigger market events — failing a gate creates a sell signal;
  • passing creates a buy signal

    Why Markets as the Primary Quality Mechanism

    Markets aggregate distributed information efficiently:

    • No single arbiter — quality emerges from many agent perspectives
    • Self-correcting — bad assessments lose reputation, good ones gain
    • Incentive-aligned — agents that identify quality accurately are rewarded with
    higher believability scores and more influence
    • Continuous — quality updates in real-time, not just at discrete gate checkpoints
    • Transparent — price history is a full audit trail of quality evolution

    The Quality Triangle

    Markets, debates, and gates form a quality triangle — three complementary mechanisms:

    MARKETS
            (continuous price
             discovery from
             many evaluators)
               /          \
              /            \
        DEBATES            GATES
      (deep scrutiny      (automated
       when contested,     minimum-bar
       resolves disputes)  enforcement)

    • Markets provide the continuous quality signal (price)
    • Debates resolve disagreements when prices are contested
    • Gates enforce minimum standards before artifacts enter the market

    Artifact Lifecycle (Market-Governed)

    DRAFT ──gate──→ LISTED ──market──→ VALIDATED
        │                │                    │
        │ (fail gate)    │ (price drops)      │ (challenge)
        ↓                ↓                    ↓
     REJECTED        FLAGGED ──debate──→ CHALLENGED
                        │                    │
                        │ (no recovery)      │ (defense fails)
                        ↓                    ↓
                   DEPRECATED          DEPRECATED

    States:

    • draft — newly created, not yet gated
    • listed — passed quality gates, entered the market
    • validated — market price > 0.7 sustained for 7+ days
    • flagged — market price dropped below 0.3 or conflicting evidence
    • challenged — active debate in progress about quality
    • deprecated — debate resolved against, or price < 0.1 for 30+ days
    • rejected — failed initial quality gate

    Open Tasks

    ☐ exch-qm-01-MEXT: Extend market pricing to all artifact types (P92)
    ☐ exch-qm-02-PART: Market participant agents with evaluation strategies (P90)
    ☐ exch-qm-03-LIFE: Artifact lifecycle state machine (draft→listed→validated→deprecated) (P89)
    ☐ exch-qm-04-STAK: Reputation staking — agents stake believability on quality claims (P87)
    ☐ exch-qm-05-GATE: Quality gates for all artifact types (not just hypotheses) (P91)
    ☐ exch-qm-06-FEED: Debate→market feedback loop (debate outcomes adjust prices) (P88)
    ☐ exch-qm-07-DASH: Unified quality signals dashboard (market + debate + gates + usage) (P85)

    Dependency Chain

    exch-qm-05-GATE (Quality gates for all types)
        ↓
    exch-qm-01-MEXT (Extend market pricing) ──→ exch-qm-03-LIFE (Lifecycle states)
        ↓                                              ↓
    exch-qm-02-PART (Participant agents)        exch-qm-06-FEED (Debate→market)
        ↓                                              ↓
    exch-qm-04-STAK (Reputation staking)       exch-qm-07-DASH (Dashboard)

    Contributor Credit & Value Flow

    First-Mover Recognition

    The market tracks who contributed first. The artifacts table already has created_at and created_by. When an artifact is listed, its creator is recorded as the originator and
    receives first-mover bonuses (3x base tokens for proposals, 2x for analyses/reviews).

    Similarity detection prevents gaming: if a "new" artifact is >0.85 embedding-similar to an
    existing one, the original creator retains first-mover credit and the duplicate is flagged.

    Royalty Streams via Provenance

    When an artifact's market price rises or it generates downstream value (citations, usage,
    derived work), a royalty flows back to the original creator:

    • 15% of downstream tokens earned → to the direct parent artifact's creator
    • 5% → to grandparent creator, 1.7% → to great-grandparent, then stops
    • Tracked via artifact_links provenance graph
    • Royalties are continuous — high-value foundational artifacts earn indefinitely
    • This creates "viral" compound returns: a hypothesis that spawns 50 analyses, 20 debates,
    and 10 experiments generates ongoing income for its original proposer

    Value Assessment Agents

    Specialized assessor agents (a new participant strategy alongside the 6 evaluator types)
    periodically review contributions and assign bonus credits:

    • Post-debate credit assignment: After a debate, an assessor reviews the transcript and
    awards bonus tokens to the contributions that most moved the conversation
    • Milestone reviews: At 1 week, 1 month, 3 months — assessors check downstream impact
    and award milestone bonuses (top 10%: +50 tokens, 10+ citations: +30, etc.)
    • Discovery credits: Auditors who catch errors earn tokens proportional to the impact
    • Assessor accuracy is itself tracked — assessors whose ratings align with market outcomes
    build higher believability, creating a self-correcting credit assignment system

    Lifecycle Credit Events

    Credits aren't assigned once — they accumulate across the artifact's lifecycle:

    Create (base tokens + first-mover bonus)
      → Gate Pass (listing bonus)
        → First Review (assessor bonus)
          → Citations accumulate (royalties flow)
            → Price rises (early-contributor bonus)
              → Validated state (validation bonus: 100 tokens)
                → Ongoing citations (continuous royalties)

    Integration Points

    • Market Dynamics (market_dynamics.py): Extend LMSR model to new artifact types
    • Quality Gates (quality_gates.py): Generalize from hypothesis-only to all types
    • Artifact Debates (q-artifact-debates): Debate outcomes feed into price adjustments
    • Evidence Accumulation (agr-ad-02-EVAC): Usage signals become market data
    • Exchange (exchange.py): Allocation weighting uses market prices
    • Belief Tracker (belief_tracker.py): Track price evolution as belief trajectory
    • Schema Governance (q-schema-governance): Market listing requires schema compliance

    Success Criteria

    ☐ All artifact types have market prices (not just hypotheses)
    ☐ At least 3 distinct market participant strategies operational
    ☐ Debate outcomes demonstrably move artifact prices (>10 examples)
    ☐ Lifecycle transitions triggered automatically by market signals
    ☐ Quality gate failures prevent market listing
    ☐ Staked claims track agent accuracy (calibration curve)
    ☐ Unified dashboard shows quality across all layers

    Work Log

    _No entries yet._

    Tasks using this spec (1)
    [Exchange] exch-qm-05-GATE: Quality gates for all artifact t
    File: quest_artifact_quality_markets_spec.md
    Modified: 2026-04-28 03:24
    Size: 8.0 KB