Using ZK proof to boost xExchange and MultiversX on-chain usage metrics

General Discussions
1

Blockchain Proposal: Incentivizing On-Chain Usage with ZK Proofs

Introduction: Enhancing on-chain usage is critical for the growth and sustainability of our blockchain ecosystem. By incentivizing active participation, we can attract new builders and users, thereby increasing network metrics and overall MultiversX appeal. This proposal outlines a strategy to achieve this through the utilization of Brevis, a tool for proving on-chain usage via Zero-Knowledge (ZK) proof, across various xExchange.

Utilizing Brevis for xExchange Adoption: Brevis, integrated with xExchange, can enable users to cryptographically prove their on-chain activity, leveraging trustless data computation of liquidity providers (LPs) and traders’ historical transactions. I propose implementing ZK proofs within xExchange to incentivize trading and xExchange activity. Similar to mechanisms employed by platforms like Uniswap, traders with higher trade volumes can produce ZK proofs, granting them discounts on transaction fees. This approach:

  • Rewards high-volume traders, encouraging them to utilize xExchange.
  • Increase volumes cause of a more trader-friendly environment**

Enhancing Metastaking through Usage-Driven Rewards: For metastaking, I suggest introducing usage-driven rewards to augment staking incentives for active xExchange users or participants in specific projects. By tying staking rewards to on-chain activity, we incentivize continued engagement and participation, increasing the network’s utility and attractiveness. Users may receive boosts based on xExchange and specific projects usage.

An example could be increased UTK metastaking rewards based on xMoney transactions volume or number.

Revamping Metabonding for Increased Adoption: Metabonding, while offering benefits to MEX holders, currently lacks attractiveness for projects due to its distribution mechanics. To address this, I propose a paradigm shift by incorporating usage-based rewards. Rather than solely distributing tokens based on XMEX holdings, I suggest a model that amplifies rewards for active platform users. For instance, users conducting transactions via the Utrust payment platform could receive enhanced metabonding rewards proportional to their transaction volumes. This approach achieves dual objectives:

  • Incentivizes user activity, driving adoption of the platform.
  • Makes metabonding more appealing to projects, leading to broader adoption and utilization.

Conclusion: By integrating Brevis with xExchange and implementing usage-driven incentives across various MultiversX products, we can significantly enhance on-chain usage. This approach not only rewards active participants but can also attract new users and projects, potentially increasing MultiversX ecosystem adoption.

4 Likes
2

Hello,

I find the subject very interesting—thank you for bringing it up.

I share your curiosity about Zero Knowledge technology, although I am not familiar with the Brevis protocol. However, I wonder about the relevance of using ZK, since all the data used would be on-chain (and known / already public).
Would this pertain to a user’s activity on MultiversX, or on other blockchains as well ?
Maybe it could be relevant for storage optimization ?
As well as for leveraging benefits associated with an address without necessarily linking it to the address providing those benefits.
I would be delighted to learn more about the relevance of using such technology in this specific context.

Regarding the use of on-chain data and the activity of an address, I fully agree with you that it is essential to use this information to reward key players in the ecosystem (those who add value), especially users and liquidity providers.

Liquidity providers, in particular, are indeed the pillars of a DEX. The proposal to adjust rewards based on the relevance of their actions is an idea that could indeed contribute to creating a virtuous circle beneficial to the entire ecosystem.

The concept for metastacking and metabonding is also very interesting. Here, too, lies a challenge. How do we define which actions should be rewarded? And is this action more relevant compared to another, even if it is repeated?
It might be worth exploring topics such as quadratic functions to weigh activities, which also hold promising potential.

These mechanisms could not only optimize incentives within a DEX but also be applied to other products, such as xLaunchpad. Adapting the criteria for selecting winning tickets based on users’ on-chain activity could make the process more relevant and aligned with the ecosystem’s dynamics.

:wave:

2 Likes
3

Hi @davycrypto !

Welcome on the xExchange Agora! First time we see you here.

Very interesting ideas!

Could you please at least give some documentation around Brevis?

For example, for the case 1 “Utilizing Brevis for xExchange Adoption”, could you please detail more precisely what would be implementation there? Which discount for which usage and how Brevis would help compared to simply storing the information on a storage on-chain? :pray:

Side note: I’ve moved the post in the General Discussions as the xEIP Drafts is reserved for proposals following the template and being actionable.

4

@mathis-hyperia-labs Very good questions also I’ve asked myself. Curious to here more about the thoughts of @davycrypto :eyes:

1 Like
5

Hey! I think ZK could allow for a more efficient way to prove such data to the smart contracts.

I had this idea of rewarding users and stumbled upon Brevis ZK implementation to give traders fees discount when trading on Uniswap. That’s something already live.

For metabonding I’d decide on what actions is feasible to track and let metabonding projects to decide which actions they’d like users to do.

On metastaking, we should ask ourselves if it’s beneficial to reward similarly those providing liquidity and only those providing assets. I’d direct more rewards on LP and base simple tokens metastaking based on some actions in the specific project the token is for. That project would decide on the requirements.

I think this would be beneficial first for the chain creating and incentivizing more activity, and xExchange becoming more attractive for projects to build metastaking farms on, and for projects giving staking but also increasing their own project users’ activity.

6

Thanks @davycrypto for having elaborated! :pray:

For the fees discount, metabonding and metastaking, these are all great ideas, which sounds to be doable without ZK. Do you know how ZK would help here? As it is still unclear to me.