--Author:ViewDAO.DaPangDun、ViewDAO.zhihong、ViewDAO.realAlitta
👆Following the previous article, we analyzed the liquidity problem of NFT. In the article, we pointed out:
If NFT is to be combined with DEFI, most important infrastructure is the "NFT oracle"
In this article, we will discuss with you the NFT oracle-related projects on the market and the pricing mechanisms or models they use to fully understand the current development direction and development of this track.
We have collected the current oracle projects for NFT prices, mainly including:
Abacus 、Upshot、Nftgo、Banksea、Chainlink
Among them, Nftgo has not found any related oracle mechanism for the time being. The official website said that it will be developed. It is estimated that it has not been done well, so it is excluded.
Chainlink is also trying to intervene in the field of NFT oracles, but there is no corresponding data to analyze. It uses TWAP to give the floor price of NFT. I will not do a detailed analysis here.
Let's understand one by one 👇👇
Website、white paper、related materials
Abacus has two pricing mechanisms:
1.1.1 Peer incentive pricing (explained in detail in the previous article, refer to 3.5)
1.1.2 Abacus Spot (explained in detail in the previous article, refer to 3.5)
Abacus Spot realizes real-time valuation of NFT by creating a liquid market for traders to speculate on the value of NFT pools.
Liquidity is generated by traders initially entering the pool and further minting throughout its lifetime. The protocol ties the value of NFT transactions to the true NFT value by requiring owners to exit either by paying a fee to the holder or by exchanging the proceeds for liquidity in the pool through a public auction.
1.2.1 Create a pool
When a mining pool is active, pool owners have “credentials” which give them the right to withdraw NFTs from the pool by paying an exit fee to token holders or selling them in an auction. Using credentials, NFT owners can trade, lend, or borrow using the value reflected in the pool. Additionally, pool owners receive transaction fees generated by the pool's trading volume, similar to typical DEX liquidity providers.
1.2.2 Trading
1)After creating the pool, you can start trading. The pool operates as an Automated Market Maker (AMM).
This is the origin of the real-time price of NFT: the value of the pool is the real-time price of NFT
2)If the NFT is considered to be undervalued, there may be a rush to buy the tokens in the pool, and if the supply of tokens in the pool cannot cover the valuation of the NFT, the buyer will short the pool. As a result, interested speculators can mint new coins at a premium in the event that the pool’s token supply dries up.
1.2.3 Vault closed
Vault closing occurs in one of two ways:
1)Close the auction
The first way to withdraw locked NFTs is to auction NFTs (where the owner can participate). In order to initiate an auction, owners start voting, which must be approved by token holder votes. At the start of the auction, transactions are locked and no other users are allowed to enter or exit the liquidity pool. After the auction,
--The auction price of NFT will be given to all holders of NFT tokens, which will be distributed according to the proportion of ownership (it may be a loss or a profit)
--The winning bidder will get NFT
--NFT owners get the value of the pool
2)Give an exit fee to exit
The NFT owner pays an exit fee to redeem the NFT, and the exit fee will be distributed by all token holders in proportion to their ownership. As mining pools will compete with each other for liquidity, we expect the exit fee percentage to reach market equilibrium as owners must choose an exit fee high enough to incentivize participation.
For related examples, you can refer to some of the content in the previous article (refer to 3.7.3)
1.3.1 Lending
Because the price of NFT is the real-time value of the pool (because it is a competition, it can reflect the actual value of NFT), so it can seamlessly participate in lending.
1.3.2 Lever
Interestingly, this pricing method allows NFT owners to use leverage (NFT owners buy in the liquidity pool themselves, which is equivalent to using leverage).
In fact, in addition to buying tokens, traders have the opportunity to short NFT pools they believe are overvalued, according to officials.
Upshot One is committed to becoming a common NFT oracle project on the market, and its pricing mechanism has gone through two stages:
By devising a series of mechanisms to let the agents (the people answering the question) answer the question honestly and with high quality, and then select the highest quality answer as the "answer" to the question.
2.2.1 Progress
Step 1: Ask questions
Anyone can ask questions on Upshot, but must follow these rules
Step 2: Answer
The agent puts in a bet and then answers as many questions as possible as honestly as possible. The higher the stake, the higher the confidence, the more questions can be answered, and the more likely it will be accepted as the final answer.
Step 3: Choose
Upshot will "randomly sample without replacement" 3 proxies as subsequent scored answers.
Step 4: Scoring
Feed the selected proxy answers to Upshot One's peer-to-peer prediction mechanism in an attempt to elicit honest information without any means of verification (i.e. not necessarily ground truth). And this peer-to-peer prediction mechanism has the characteristics of non-minimum mechanism, multi-tasking and DMI mechanism.
Explain a few terms:
[Non-minimal mechanism]: It is to ask participants to provide information beyond the answer itself. That is, they asked participants how likely it was that others would say the same answer as them, and the participants who scored the highest were either "least surprised" or "least wrong" or "most predictive."
[Multitasking]: Let the agents answer as many questions as possible to increase the relevance of the answers
[DMI mechanism]: This means that at least three participants must answer at least 2C questions (where C = the number of possible answers, so C = 2 for "yes or no" questions) in order to score any set of answers. Participants' answers were aggregated into columns and indexed by their respective questions.
The columns are paired with each other and then split in half. Each "half-column pairing" was transformed into a matrix listing the number of overlapping answers between participants. For a binary question of "yes or no", a 2x2 matrix is formed, then the determinant of the matrix is calculated and multiplied by another matrix.
If an agent always says "yes" despite the fact that honest answers to certain questions are a mix of "yes" and "no", then whenever a contradictory agent is paired with an honest agent, their The score will be lower.
Step 5: Fork
The nature of a problem may be subjective, and one may wish to resolve again (for example, if you said "yes" and you liked the outfit, but the problem was resolved as "no", then perhaps you should use a different set of resolutions) scheme to curate your fashion), so Upshot allows forking (i.e. breaking away) a series of resolutions.
2.2.2 Result
Upshot originally planned to use this question-and-answer protocol to price NFTs on the market, such as asking whether the price of the NFT is between 1~2ETH, or whether the price of X NFT is higher than that of Y NFT, etc. to determine the price of NFT, but this This method has obvious disadvantages:
Therefore, the project party gave up using this question-and-answer mechanism to price NFTs, and turned to machine learning (ML) with high scalability, high accuracy, and high efficiency to give NFTs a fully automatic and smoother pricing.
Upshot's machine learning model is based on historical sales data and NFT metadata to comprehensively analyze and predict, and based on these valuable information and historical sales data, it is converted into a denser and richer data set, rather than relying only on a single NFT. Price trends to generate accurate and reliable pricing.
2.3.1 Introduction
Machine learning models are able to incorporate data not considered by simpler models, such as aggregating NFT sales histories to predict a single NFT and leveraging a range of NFT metadata. Much of the current project's research efforts are focused on building different predictors, using automated methods to discover the most important variables, and iterating to obtain a lean but robust model.
2.3.2 Features
Shapley
The model uses Shapley values to reveal the importance of different variables used in the model.
This helps explain how a complex ML model reaches its predicted NFT price, which is useful for further model development and understanding unexpected predictions.
Such analysis also helps to visualize the underlying drivers of NFT prices and identify the variables that really matter to each NFT project.
rarity value
The model constructs a rarity value based on the combination of attributes of the NFT, and the basic idea behind it involves calculating the probability of observing the attributes of the NFT. The higher this probability, the lower the rarity score. The lower the probability, the rarer, resulting in a higher rarity score.
Current models achieve fast approximations to these probabilities because it is computationally complex to compute them precisely given a large number of possible combinations. In addition to calculating the first-order rarity score, the model also calculates a second-order score, which takes into account not only the probability of observing a specific attribute, but also the probability of different pairwise combinations of attributes within the group.
This method of calculating rarity can be extended to arbitrarily high-order rarity and other NFT projects beyond CryptoPunks, where a fixed set of NFTs are issued with a fixed rarity value. Projects that release new NFTs over time may have new features that have never been seen before, requiring more complex calculations of rarity values.
Banksea aims to build an innovative, secure and efficient NFT pool-based lending center.
The protocol has two main functions: an NFT price oracle and a Pool-based NFT lending platform. The former is the basis of the latter. In this article, we will only introduce the NFT price oracle.
Banksea Oracle Architecture
Banksea Oracle consists of three parts: AI node cluster, on-chain contract, and contract interface.
[AI node cluster]: Crawling NFT-related data, extracting NFT features, and computing AI models.
[On-chain contract]: Aggregated prices provided by distributed AI nodes to provide the final NFT price and risk assessment.
[Contract interface]: Connect to NFT ecology and projects, support the development of customized pricing mechanism, and support user single NFT price query.
3.2.1 Quote Generation Process
3.2.2 How to prevent oracles from being attacked
3.2.3 How to deal with the large price fluctuations of NFT?
Through the investigation of the above-mentioned projects, our group has conducted many discussions and formed some opinions to share with you.
Advantage:
Shortcoming
Status
Evaluation
Therefore, we evaluate that even if Abacus Spot is successful, it will only target some high-net-worth NFTs, and then release the value of these NFTs and intervene in DEFI such as lending. It is unlikely to be the infrastructure for large-scale NFT pricing.
Advantage
Shortcoming
Status
Evaluation
Advantage
Shortcoming
Status
Evaluation
Compared
We compared Abacus, Upshot, and Banksea through several dimensions:
In the last article on "NFT liquidity", we pointed out:
NFT oracle is the most important infrastructure for NFT to improve liquidity, and it is also the basis for the combination of NFT and DEFI.
We very much agree with the words of the Upshot project team:
Trusted NFT Valuations Key to Mass Adoption
because:
If combined with our previous article, we can see that the prediction mechanism of NFT prices has undergone many attempts and developments:
Peer Incentive Evaluation Pricing / Game Pricing / Liquidity Pool Pricing / Algorithmic Pricing /…
The current market trend is more inclined to use algorithmic models to price NFT prices in real time. This transformation occurs in response to real needs. If NFTs are to be priced at a large scale, efficiency issues, participation costs, and complexity issues must be taken into account. It is the most ideal result if they can be automatically calculated and run by machines.
We analyze that the following two types of algorithm models will have a higher probability of success:
Machine learning models based on multi-dimensional metadata:
-- Focus on predicting the future value of NFTs (give error margins)
--Advantages: [Technical progress in machine learning is very rapid] [Self-adjustment of parameters] [Negative feedback correction based on results] [Does not require too much human intervention] [More narrative] [Higher technical moat]
--Problems to be solved: [How to ensure the accuracy of the calculation model, it takes time to test] [The model needs to be iterated when the NFT attributes change] [Different NFT series need to correspond to different models]
Weight calculation model based on historical metadata:
-- Focus on analyzing the current value of NFTs (confidence intervals are given)
--I haven't seen much of such a project on the market at present (of course, some of the methodologies are definitely there)
--Advantages: [Results are more predictable] [Only parameters need to be adjusted for different NFT series] [Changes in NFT properties may not affect the model itself]
--Problems to be solved: [The adjustment of parameters may require a lot of intervention, which is unfavorable] [The technical pool is shallow and easily copied]
3.1 What is a good oracle
We believe that a good NFT oracle should be able to automate the comprehensive pricing of head projects, rather than single and only pricing the floor price. Automation and comprehensive representation of efficiency; the effectiveness of providing quotations should be strong enough, because the market is changing rapidly; the mechanism should be simple enough, the simplest way to solve problems according to Occam's razor principle is the best, and complexity will bring uncontrollable and uncontrollable foreseen risk. Simply put, the input data is comprehensive and clean, the quotation is real-time, and the model is simple.
3.2 what to do
As to Project
According to coinmarketcap statistics, there are a total of 2,100 NFT projects, and the top 10 projects (accounting for 0.5% of the number of projects) account for 70% of the total market value. A good project is simply a whitelist mechanism. At the same time, the whitelist must have a dynamic update mechanism to filter out poorly developed NFT projects and join NFT projects that meet the requirements. (It can be understood that there must be a listing and delisting mechanism)
As to data
The oracle is a price generator. The input source data is processed by the oracle and the price is output. Therefore, making a reasonable oracle first depends on what data needs to be input.
From the data source:
--The small amount of NFT attribute data is the main factor for price determination, and it should be used as the data input by the oracle;
--The data on the NFT chain and the data of the NFT exchange, although there is some noise, are also the data that can most directly reflect the price of the NFT, which also needs to be used as the input of the oracle machine;
--The community data and social media data of the project are too noisy, the processing process is cumbersome, and the model used in the quantification process is complex and not suitable for the data source input by the oracle machine. If it is used, certain means are required to limit the weight.
Oracle model
After having the input data, the oracle machine can choose to use three forms of [rule], [model] or [rule + model] to process the data to generate the final output price.
Since the price of homogenized tokens is relatively continuous, it adopts the form of multi-node data processing and output using rules. Compared with homogenized tokens, the price of NFT is discrete and each NFT has different attributes. Simple rules are not enough. Given a reasonable price, models need to be chosen to price this subject with a more complex pattern.
Considering the real-time requirements of quotation and the interpretability of the model, a simple machine learning model is a better choice. The deep learning model is too complicated, and there will be unpredictable systemic risks in dealing with a complex quotation system.
In addition, the use of models will involve the use of historical data. Whether the price distribution of NFT changes over time is a key factor in determining the length of historical data. This part needs to be determined by fitting the model to the price trend of the head project.
We recommend everyone to keep an eye on Upshot and Banksea, and get involved if you have the chance!