Weighted voting creates a Nash equilibrium favoring honest participation, because creating additional Sybil identities yields no extra voting power absent corresponding contributions.
Source quote, verbatim
Game-theoretic analysis indicates that this creates a Nash equilibrium where honest participation is incentivized, as creating Sybil identities yields no additional voting power without corresponding contributions
From
Wulf A. Kaal, Cryptographic Foundations and Interdisciplinary Dimensions of the Secure Proof of Stake (SPoS) Conse (2025), Weighted Voting as a Sybil Attack Defense https://ssrn.com/abstract=5225296 · source PDF
Cite as
Wulf A. Kaal, Cryptographic Foundations and Interdisciplinary Dimensions of the Secure Proof of Stake (SPoS) Conse (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5225296
Holds when
constrained by cryptographic and temporal verification mechanisms
extended_bykaal:claim:6192998-030 Honest ranking strictly dominates strategic ranking for validators whenever the reputation gain from consensus...
Verify
The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is b2fec675d906334ad67e13b2d97261dc31e38061022867eb3f9ceadd95f4878d. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer. Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/ba4d014213e8b986...json Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5225296-032.md | sha256sum