Formula for successful mining in a PoW AI network
Reflections on the sustainability of the mining model.
🔹 Basic PoW mining model
As I understand it, if you represent mining as a formula, it would look like this.
📊 Variables that should be in the formula:
H - hash rate (network hashrate, total computational power
h - hashrate of a specific miner
D - network difficulty (complexity/difficulty)
R - reward for a found block
T - block finding time
C - cost of electricity per unit produced (cost)
P - coin price on the market
E - electricity consumption per hash or per miner
N - number of miners in the network
M - total coin supply
💰 Then, a miner's coin earnings over time can be expressed as:
(h/H) x (R x (time / T))That is, the miner's share of power x total reward over the time period.
💵 And the net profit in dollars:
where C x E x time are electricity expenses for the period).
📈 Network success
And the network's success, as I understand it, is determined by:
Growth of hashrate (H), which is both an indicator of interest in the network and of its security
Growth in the number of miners (N), a kind of indicator of decentralization
Stability and reliability of block discovery (T)
Interest in the coin (price dynamics P, turnover, adoption)
Stability of the economic model (coin price versus costs C)
Which can be expressed formally as:
Where:
H and N should grow and remain stable
P (price) should increase, or be above some critical break-even level
D (difficulty) self-regulates by rising/falling relative to H.
T is maintained by the system.
So, in a simple form the formula looks like:
Where Ad = adoption rate - the speed at which the network gains new users and integrates into the economy. And the network's “C” is the aggregate costs of maintenance (energy, infrastructure, increasing complexity).
🤖 Transition to decentralized AI
All of this makes sense to me applied to a PoW network. Where the higher the total hashrate, number of participants, attractiveness of the reward and real adoption (usefulness of the coin), the more successfully PoW develops.
But there is an important point, as you correctly noted, that in decentralized AI “Number of paid requests = paid results”.
That is, a PoW network in this case acquires AI-specific variables and priorities. Namely:
🧠 Real usefulness of computations.
Where computing power is spent on real practical utility (training AI, data processing, model inference).
⭐ Quality and reputation of data and computations.
That is, validity of input data, quality of produced model outputs.
🔐 Data and privacy.
The equation must also account for privacy, GDPR, legality and security of the processed data.
✅ Ability to verify the result.
So that the network does not pay for “empty” computations, verifiability is important.
🔄 Adaptivity and dynamic task allocation.
The system must be able to efficiently route tasks: send relevant jobs to appropriate nodes, for example, graphical tasks to GPUs, text tasks to CPUs, etc. This already adds several more variables, the number of which depends on the number of node types currently present.
🏗 Also, an important point:
Incentivizing participants to carry task chains through to completion.
Infrastructure parameters.
Node uptime (reliability) is critical in distributed computing.
After all, the network depends on the liveness of participants.
Geodistribution is also important to reduce censorship risks, pinpoint-attacks, and to increase fault-tolerance (across countries, densities, time zones).
Speed and scalability.
Response latency matters when AI is real-time. System throughput matters as well.
Unlike BTC, tasks for AI computation are always limited. It's important to balance generation of new tasks and miners' motivation.
🔬 Model update management:
Trust coefficient for results of aggregated tasks (if AI is being trained across many nodes)
Mechanisms of “consensus of truth”, for example federated learning (model averaging, ensemble quality checks).
📊 Formula for success of decentralized AI
So, the formula we try to use to represent decentralized AI, following BTC's PoW-like consensus, should include all variables necessary to compute the success of decentralized AI.
Where:
H - computational power
Keff - efficiency of useful AI computations
Rmean - average reputation of performers
Qd - validity of results/data
Uptime - node stability/liveness
L - latency
N - network scale
Ptask - yield of a single useful task.
That is, everything important for classic PoW must also be multiplied by the priority of usefulness, quality, verifiability and resilience of distributed computations specifically for AI.
The system should reward not abstract “power”, but real contribution to intelligence, accuracy, speed and reliability of the network.
It turns out there are things we can calculate and account for, and there are things we will only observe during development. Thus, it can be assumed that systems may exhibit emergent properties that can only be measured once they appear.
🧮 In general, the following formula for calculating mining success in decentralized AI on PoW emerged.
Where:
The first part (in brackets) is the economic efficiency of PoW mining
The second part is the usefulness, quality and efficiency of computations for AI
Together they represent the real success of a miner (or the network), reflecting both the reward size and the contribution to the development of decentralized artificial intelligence.
Keff = 1 - if all computing power is dedicated solely to AI. Qd, Rmean, Uptime - the higher they are, the greater the bonus (you can introduce threshold values or nonlinear dependence; if quality is “poor” = “penalty”). L - latency: the lower the latency, the greater the success in a real-time AI system.
This formula can serve as a basis for designing reward systems, revenue distribution and task allocation in a PoW-like decentralized AI. Am I correct that miners raised a question about this?
Symbiocrat (author's nickname on Discord)
Afterword
Many thanks to everyone for their patience. Reflecting on this, I concluded that for now we should just scale up what we can and promptly address emerging system challenges. I'm not an AI expert, but I understand well how to scale computing power, liquidity and the number of system participants. What upsets me is that my effectiveness alone is negligible, and I can't get an audience with the Libermans.
I believe mathematics is present in everything. Therefore, with high probability, on the basis of such a decentralized AI it will be possible to calculate any reality with high confidence (from an individual person to the universe). Humanity will be able to uncover the mysteries of the past and the future.
As a child I imagined a time machine a little differently )) I hope my thoughts not only bothered some people at work, but were also useful to someone.
The article was created based on correspondence on Discord.
THE END
Last updated