Neurochain

NeuroChain's design is focused on intelligent business applications, architecture, communication protocol, machine learning algorithms and connectivity with other Blockchains.

About Neurochain

NeuroChain claims to be the new generation of blockchain technology, following Ethereum and Bitcoin. NeuroChain aims to utilize artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in order to assess the quality of each blockchain actor. It is proposed that bots on the network will be able to collaborate and contribute in order to further develop higher levels of general artificial intelligence. Users will be able to develop their own bots deploy them on the network. NCC tokens will be used to access AI/ML services, allow for the creation of intelligent applications, and reward network operators.

Token Sale Use of Blockchain

Product

2.4
Product
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

3.0
N/A
3 - Has growth potential.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.

Product

The level of competition that NeuroChain faces is considerable. There is a fairly thorough comparison with the platform’s competitors (Bitcoin and Ethereum). It is stated that NeuroChain will be capable of hundreds of thousands transactions per second and that file storage will be done using IPFS (InterPlanetary File System). The bots used on the platform also act as the nodes and will verify transactions when elected. The GitHub page is provided and shows high levels of content and recent activity and also contains repositories for the prototype and for experiments/proof-of-concepts. Some competitors of the platform are addressed (Matrix, Seele, and Deepbrain), and the organization believes that NeuroChain has a better consensus protocol and/or business model.

Product Whitepaper

Use of Blockchain

3.8
Use of Blockchain
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

4.0
N/A
4 - Innovative use of blockchain technology.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

4.0
N/A
4 - Generally disruptive.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

4.0
N/A
4 - Token is essential to platform.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Mostly decentralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.

Use of Blockchain

NCC is an ERC20 compliant token. There is a lack of content regarding the token’s use cases. The entirety of the discussion takes place within a few bulletpoints. NCC tokens will give access to AI/ML services provided by the platform, allow for the creation of intelligent applications, and will be used to reward network operators. The governance structure of the platform is clearly discussed in the document and states that “Proof of Involvement and Integrity and proof of workflow are self-consistent consensus algorithms based on three independent parameters reflecting the involvement, value holding and integrity of each Bot”.

Use of Blockchain Roadmap

Whitepaper

3.8
Whitepaper
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

4.0
N/A
4 - Satisfactory coverage, well written.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

2.0
N/A
2 - Difficult, tech / marketing babble.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

5.0
N/A
5 - Candid openness.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.

Whitepaper

There are two documents for the whitepaper, one focused on the business development plan of NeuroChain and one that discusses the technical aspects of the platform. Fairly thorough background information is provided to justify the platform and it is stated that there are three main areas where NeuroChain will bring improvements to the blockchain ecosystem: energy requirements, transaction speed, and smart contract agility. The technical document is 52 pages in length and discusses the technical aspects of the platform with significantly high levels of detail (not intended for laypeople). The business oriented document is 51 pages in length and the content is fairly extensive. Financial projections are presented for the next 3 years. The use of proceeds is also discussed thoroughly and is accompanied with researched projections for the next 5 years. Overall, the documents are significantly comprehensive and as a result, require a considerable amount of time to read and understand (there is a considerable amount of jargon and buzzwords in the document).

Whitepaper Compliance

Roadmap

2.6
Roadmap
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated.
Feasibility

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

2.0
N/A
2 - Very ambitious.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

2.0
N/A
2 - Not fully available or trustworthy.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.

Roadmap

The roadmap spans from August 2016 to March 2023.
Milestones reached thus far include:
* August 2016 – Writing a book about blockchain (ENI editions)
* October 2018 – Presentation of the concept at Paris Microsoft Experience
* December 2016- Feasibility analysis of NeuroChain / Preparing white paper
* June 2018 – Preparing NeuroChain ICO
* October 2017 – Presentation of the concept at Paris Microsoft Experience with Interxion
* December 2017 – Realisation of NeuroChain Prototype (Proof of Concept)

Further development of the platform is segregated into four versions as follows:

* January 2019 – V1: The new Blockchain infrastructure based on Proof of involvement and integrity.
* June 2019 – V2: Integration of Proof of Workflow allowing intelligent applications based on Machine Learning
* March 2019 – V3: The integration of intelligence sharing property by the Bots and instauration of collective artificial intelligence.
* March 2023 – V4: Self-consistent distributed system will be achieved where the Bots experience a form of autonomy.

Roadmap Company and Team

Compliance

3.0
Compliance
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

3.0
N/A
3 - Partly; compliance not fully assured.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

4.0
N/A
4 - Specific, detailed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

4.0
N/A
4 - Professional.

Compliance

There is a general warning in the beginning of the business document that is one page in length. Additionally, there are legal disclaimers and discussions regarding the risks associated with the platform and the token sale, as well as the KYC procedure that is planned to be used for the ICO. It is explicitly stated that NCC tokens are to be considered utility tokens.

Compliance Token Sale

Company and Team

3.4
Company and Team
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

4.0
N/A
4 - Fully assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.

Company and Team

The core team of 15 individuals are listed on the NeuroChain website, along with their profile pictures, job titles and links to LinkedIn profiles. Most individuals on the team have a technical background. The CTO has PhD in nuclear physics, extensive quantitative research experience (machine learning, artificial intelligence) and has written a book that is focused on blockchain. Information about the CEO is somewhat lacking: the LinkedIn profile is not comprehensive. Overall, the team possesses a large number of individuals with respectable credentials and relevant experience.

Company and Team Product

Token Sale

2.6
Token Sale
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat greedy or unrelated to plans.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.

Token Sale

The total number of NCC tokens is 4.374 billion (70% is for elected bots, 15% is for investors, 10% is for the founding team and advisors, 3% is for the foundation, and 2% is for the seed fund). The allocation of funds is described with moderate detail (55% is for technical resources, 29% is for external resources, 7% is for GA/Finance/HR/Legal, 5% is for marketing, and 4% is for business development). The soft cap is 7.5M EUR and the hard cap is 30M EUR, where 1 NCC = 0.08 EUR. Unsold tokens will be locked and “will progressively be made available over time to finance the following steps of the project according to the roadmap”. The public token sale takes place on March 18, 2018.

Product

The level of competition that NeuroChain faces is considerable. There is a fairly thorough comparison with the platform’s competitors (Bitcoin and Ethereum). It is stated that NeuroChain will be capable of hundreds of thousands transactions per second and that file storage will be done using IPFS (InterPlanetary File System). The bots used on the platform also act as the nodes and will verify transactions when elected. The GitHub page is provided and shows high levels of content and recent activity and also contains repositories for the prototype and for experiments/proof-of-concepts. Some competitors of the platform are addressed (Matrix, Seele, and Deepbrain), and the organization believes that NeuroChain has a better consensus protocol and/or business model.

Category Breakdown
Readiness

Is the product ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Appeal

How appealing is the product? How good or necessary is it? Does it have a distinct edge?

2.0
N/A
2 - Meh, okay.
Target User Base

Is it mass market or niche?

3.0
N/A
3 - Has growth potential.
Competition

Are there many other similar solutions or is this one of just a few, or even one of a kind?

3.0
N/A
3 - Some normal competition.
Innovation

How innovative or inventive is the product, either conceptually or technologically?

2.0
N/A
2 - Some, but nothing outstanding.
Product Score:
2.4

Use of Blockchain

NCC is an ERC20 compliant token. There is a lack of content regarding the token’s use cases. The entirety of the discussion takes place within a few bulletpoints. NCC tokens will give access to AI/ML services provided by the platform, allow for the creation of intelligent applications, and will be used to reward network operators. The governance structure of the platform is clearly discussed in the document and states that “Proof of Involvement and Integrity and proof of workflow are self-consistent consensus algorithms based on three independent parameters reflecting the involvement, value holding and integrity of each Bot”.

Category Breakdown
Blockchain Development

Is blockchain technology essential? Does it make the solution significantly different and better?

4.0
N/A
4 - Innovative use of blockchain technology.
Disruptive Blockchain Advantage

How disruptive is the introduction of blockchain technology into the product's market space?

4.0
N/A
4 - Generally disruptive.
Need for a Custom Token (vs. BTC or ETH)

Is the token essential or could it be done just as well or better with fiat or Bitcoin?

4.0
N/A
4 - Token is essential to platform.
System Decentralization (besides token)

How decentralized is the system architecture other than the token (e.g., data collection, storage, access, and use, or decision making processes, etc.)?

4.0
N/A
4 - Mostly decentralized.
Contribution to Blockchain Ecosystem

How compelling is the solution's contribution to the evolution of blockchain infrastructure and economy?

3.0
N/A
3 - Interesting.
Use of Blockchain Score:
3.8

Whitepaper

There are two documents for the whitepaper, one focused on the business development plan of NeuroChain and one that discusses the technical aspects of the platform. Fairly thorough background information is provided to justify the platform and it is stated that there are three main areas where NeuroChain will bring improvements to the blockchain ecosystem: energy requirements, transaction speed, and smart contract agility. The technical document is 52 pages in length and discusses the technical aspects of the platform with significantly high levels of detail (not intended for laypeople). The business oriented document is 51 pages in length and the content is fairly extensive. Financial projections are presented for the next 3 years. The use of proceeds is also discussed thoroughly and is accompanied with researched projections for the next 5 years. Overall, the documents are significantly comprehensive and as a result, require a considerable amount of time to read and understand (there is a considerable amount of jargon and buzzwords in the document).

Category Breakdown
Comprehensiveness

Does it cover the full scope of the problem and solution?

4.0
N/A
4 - Satisfactory coverage, well written.
Readability

Is it easy enough to understand?

2.0
N/A
2 - Difficult, tech / marketing babble.
Transparency

Does it candidly describe and disclose where the project now stands, how much exists and how much still needs to be done, etc.?

5.0
N/A
5 - Candid openness.
Business Plan Presentation

Does it contain a viable, comprehensive business plan?

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.
Technology Presentation

Does it present a well thought out technological architecture? Does it address implementational challenges?

4.0
N/A
4 - Clear, well thought out, realistic.
Whitepaper Score:
3.8

Roadmap

The roadmap spans from August 2016 to March 2023.
Milestones reached thus far include:
* August 2016 – Writing a book about blockchain (ENI editions)
* October 2018 – Presentation of the concept at Paris Microsoft Experience
* December 2016- Feasibility analysis of NeuroChain / Preparing white paper
* June 2018 – Preparing NeuroChain ICO
* October 2017 – Presentation of the concept at Paris Microsoft Experience with Interxion
* December 2017 – Realisation of NeuroChain Prototype (Proof of Concept)

Further development of the platform is segregated into four versions as follows:

* January 2019 – V1: The new Blockchain infrastructure based on Proof of involvement and integrity.
* June 2019 – V2: Integration of Proof of Workflow allowing intelligent applications based on Machine Learning
* March 2019 – V3: The integration of intelligence sharing property by the Bots and instauration of collective artificial intelligence.
* March 2023 – V4: Self-consistent distributed system will be achieved where the Bots experience a form of autonomy.

Category Breakdown
Concreteness

Is there a concrete and practical development plan (vs. just a conceptual vision)?

3.0
N/A
3 - An overall plan, major milestones stated.
Feasibility

Is the development plan realistic? Is it based on reasonable goals and timelines?

2.0
N/A
2 - Very ambitious.
Vision

Is there a larger, long-term vision?

4.0
N/A
4 - Long term.
Dependencies (services or capabilities)

How available, operational, or trusted are the other systems or capabilities on which the project relies?

2.0
N/A
2 - Not fully available or trustworthy.
Current Position

Where is the project now, relative to its vision and plans?

2.0
N/A
2 - Critical obstacles ahead.
Roadmap Score:
2.6

Compliance

There is a general warning in the beginning of the business document that is one page in length. Additionally, there are legal disclaimers and discussions regarding the risks associated with the platform and the token sale, as well as the KYC procedure that is planned to be used for the ICO. It is explicitly stated that NCC tokens are to be considered utility tokens.

Category Breakdown
Token Utility (value through usage)

How much use is there for the token itself (regardless of its value as an investment vehicle)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minimal or contrived.
Token as Security (tradable instrument)

How valuable is the token as an investment vehicle or financial instrument?

3.0
N/A
3 - Partly; compliance not fully assured.
Token/Smart-Contract Readiness

Is the blockchain infrastructure of the project ready for use? Is there a working prototype or MVP? How long until it is operational?

2.0
N/A
2 - Proof of concept or test platform.
Attention to Compliance Issues

How much attention is given to compliance (via token and ecosystem design, token sale participation, etc.)? Is this issue addressed directly and coherently?

4.0
N/A
4 - Specific, detailed.
Legal Review/Risk Assessment

What kind of legal documentation (reviews or agreements) and risk assessment are provided?

4.0
N/A
4 - Professional.
Compliance Score:
3.0

Company and Team

The core team of 15 individuals are listed on the NeuroChain website, along with their profile pictures, job titles and links to LinkedIn profiles. Most individuals on the team have a technical background. The CTO has PhD in nuclear physics, extensive quantitative research experience (machine learning, artificial intelligence) and has written a book that is focused on blockchain. Information about the CEO is somewhat lacking: the LinkedIn profile is not comprehensive. Overall, the team possesses a large number of individuals with respectable credentials and relevant experience.

Category Breakdown
Company Stage and Foundation

Is the company already established? Has it raised funds before? Is it mature?

3.0
N/A
3 - Company structure in place.
Background of Lead Team Members

Do we know who they are? Do they have LinkedIn profiles? Do they have solid, relevant backgrounds?

3.0
N/A
3 - Minimally sufficient.
Team Assembly and Commitment

Is a solid, fully committed core team in place? Do they have online (e.g. LinkedIn) profiles showing sufficient relevant experience? Is their participation transparent?

4.0
N/A
4 - Fully assembled and committed.
Team Skill Set Relevance

Does the amount of talent and skill in each area seem to fit the project requirements?

4.0
N/A
4 - Well suited to project requirements.
Team Skill Set Balance

Is the team well-rounded (biz/tech/blockchain)? Is there sufficient talent and skill in all areas of required development?

3.0
N/A
3 - Somewhat uncertain, probably okay.
Company and Team Score:
3.4

Token Sale

The total number of NCC tokens is 4.374 billion (70% is for elected bots, 15% is for investors, 10% is for the founding team and advisors, 3% is for the foundation, and 2% is for the seed fund). The allocation of funds is described with moderate detail (55% is for technical resources, 29% is for external resources, 7% is for GA/Finance/HR/Legal, 5% is for marketing, and 4% is for business development). The soft cap is 7.5M EUR and the hard cap is 30M EUR, where 1 NCC = 0.08 EUR. Unsold tokens will be locked and “will progressively be made available over time to finance the following steps of the project according to the roadmap”. The public token sale takes place on March 18, 2018.

Category Breakdown
Raise Amount Max

Is there a clear cap? Is the maximum raise amount modestly sufficient (as opposed to either greedy or insufficient)?

2.0
N/A
2 - Somewhat greedy or unrelated to plans.
Raise Amount Min

Is the minimum raise reasonable considering the development plan? Are there raise-amount dependent milestones?

3.0
N/A
3 - Justifiable.
Fund Allocation

Is fund distribution and allocation reasonable and justified?

3.0
N/A
3 - Rough estimates, but sensible.
Token Allocation

Is the ratio of tokens sold to those kept reasonable? Does it prevent the company from having too much control?

3.0
N/A
3 - Sufficient company/community interest balance.
Media Presence and Following

Is the sale being talked about in Reddit, Bitcointalk, Social Media, Medium, etc.? Is information available and accessible? Is there interest?

2.0
N/A
2 - Minor exposure and interest, or ambivalent reception.
Token Sale Score:
2.6
It is stated that "the main difference between smart contract proposed by Ethereum and intelligent application proposed by NeuroChain, is the planning world (decision system)." What specifically can be accomplished using intelligent contracts that is not possible using Ethereum smart contracts? Can you provide a specific example?

In theory, any linear problem can be realised through a machine learning algorithm. The reason lies in the fact that linear problems are a special case on the mathematical point of view. You can evaluate a picture, a video or even sound with machine learning and deep learning. You cannot with linear programming. Hence, image recognition to prevent stealth in a supermarket can at last be detected (for a given confidence interval). Other use cases that cannot be done with ‘conventional programming’ reaches out the following use cases:

–  HR: Identify true from false CVs. Enrich dynamically the optimal research algorithm and prevent psychological bias on the selection process.

–  Logistics: Improve trading routes and automatic redirection of products in case of crisis with optimal allocation based on stocks

–  Automotives: Make the car drive autonomously

–  Defense: Create fake random routes for surveillance purpose and prevent murder or robbery

–  Business : Identify leads and transform them into clients thanks to multi factor (above 10.000) modeling that identify when the lead will purchase. Particularly useful for committing purchases.

Many more cases are not currently reachable without artificial intelligence.

What AI/ML related competitors has NeuroChain investigated (if any), and how does NeuroChain compare?

Two types of competitors : traditional industry and blockchain industry.

The first ones would be cloud computing allowing machine learning services. Amazon has it as well as Google. In practice ou solution may be ‘installed’ on a cloud infrastructure but has a crucial advantage. You get paid for sharing your code when it is used. Through cloud, it is much trickier to share both algorithms and results. To conclude they are in practice symbiosis stakeholders to our strategy.

The other competitors are Matrix, Seele, HOKO and Deepbrain for instance. Their business model is sometimes dubious and cannot be maintained on the long run, typically Deepbrain. Matrix uses so called artificial intelligence to create a more complexe Delegated Proof of stake and proposes to solve real life problems instead of a puzzle as with bitcoin. In practice, two problems cannot be of the same complexity and is a failure by design. Seele proposes a market place of machine learning algorithm. Definitely a competitor, except that our solution is a ‘ready to use’ algorithm, without massive DevOps requirements. Deepbrain is amazing so that it proposes to create an ecosystem of AI algorithms. The architecture is smart and the logic is interesting. The usage of the blockchain is solely to use the gas, much as for ethereum. The consensus however is based on NEO blockchain : delegated byzantine fault tolerance. This is a fancy word for Proof of Work with the delegated feature. In other words, the Neurochain consensus is much faster.

Neurochain proposes a decentralised market place where you can execute algorithms out of the box. It is therefore a bit like the Youtube of AI. It is also a place where any one can deposit the subject of his work, with a corporate grade efficiency, which is missing to ethereum for instance. It is also a place of exchange where community thrives to improve the underlying bricks thanks to an open source code. Our team has a real business plan over five years and expect to use the Neurochain to develop business applications for clients in the future. To do so, we deployed a new consensus that is based on technical properties of the Bots, while preventing attacks.

To summarize, Neurochain shall work in partnership with cloud giants, while proving technical superiority over blockchain competitors. The community aspect could not be tackled in current comparison. Yet, it appears crucial to our understanding. Therefore we piled up and will continue to expand the community and partnerships in parallel with the technical development.

Will the ERC20-based NCC tokens be able to interact directly with the NeuroChain platform or will they be transferred to a different token once the platform is ready?

NCC (Neurochain clausisus) are the tokens for current project. They are ERC20 for the ICO. In the future we expect to call for an API to allow transaction between ETH (ether) and NCC. We also plan to create an ERC 20 like system to allow subsequent projects to raise funds on Neurochain technology.

What is the planned inflationary/deflationary mechanism?

The currency is inflationary from day of the mainnet. Over this period the protocol should deliver the additional tokens (70% of the total supply). The total should be reached 5 years after the main net is released.

What is the vesting period(s) for the tokens allocated to the founding team and advisors?

The founding team has a vesting period of 5 years, each year 20% of their allocated funds are released. This aims at pushing founding team to pursue the development of the platform over the 5 year period.

What is the largest technological obstacle that NeuroChain faces in the future?

Bandwidth smart usage and data shuffle. Much like in Big Data context, a lot of data will be shared among the various Bots on the network. To tackle this issue we are already actively looking on the market what already exists. The OCEAN protocol is a good candidate. There is however a non negligible probability that we have to create a new protocol to tackle the machine learning or deep learning specificities. This is a reason why Neurochain is conceived to tackle several protocols dynamically and not just one as competitors do.

Is NeuroChain currently working with law and/or accounting firms? Please specify, if possible.

Yes. We have two lawyers : Mr. Roquebert and Mr. De Vauplan for post verification. The first one works with Lighthouse LHLF, a law office. He is willing to help if you have any questions.

What are the calculations/estimations involved with producing the estimated number of transactions per second for the platform?

By experience. We used a Javascript prototype to see how many transactions were available by applying a 3000 nodes communicating between each other.

Multiple pitfalls arise here:

–  Bandwidth quality

–  Node infrastructure quality and specialisation

–  Pending tasks on the node, etc.

At worst, the performance would be very close from delegated proof of stake (DPoS). The nature of the computing Bots elected due to their performance should choose always the best technical performers, where DPoS may choose poor performers of computation.

Given that AI/ML requires a significant amount of data in order to develop proficiency and and progressively improves over time, what strategies are in place for when the platform is initially deployed and the bots operating the network have not yet been thoroughly tested, and thus will be more prone to error as a result?

It seems your question merges two issues. On one side a developer ‘trains’ the model. On a second stage, he ‘delivers’ the model. If a developer delivers a model without being trained, the meta parameters that make it useful are unexploitable. Hence, it shall not b used. Therefore, any deployment must be tested before. It is in the developer best interest to train the model before delivering it. With time passing time, the best performing algorithms and the most specialised ones will be used. It is therefore crucial to promote careful documentation.

The second problem is : how does the program gets access to the required data? Currently, researchers face difficulties sharing data because it is tedious, complicate, not documented according to latest studies of Nature. We propose by default an IPFS storage and access to the data with a code book required.

The developer may or may not grant access to the data that trained the model. Yet, he grants access to the resulting model and parameters.

It is stated that "each Bot acts as an intelligent agent in the network depending on its role and its interaction with its peers". Will users be able to develop their own bot and deploy them on the platform?

Yes. Everyone may develop a program and deploy it on the Neurochain. The first stage programming language shall be C++. However, programming in C++ may be tedious. Therefore we expect to create a new meta language to allow fast machine learning programming for instance.

Use this code to share the ratings on your website