# kaal:claim:6269518-014

**Claim.** The existing citation-weighted framework provides no mechanism for verifying citation accuracy, no separate incentive for honest attribution, and no penalty for strategic under-citation, so the gap is a structural absence in the mechanism design rather than an oversight in presentation.

**Type.** failure  **Support.** argued

**Source quote.**

> This gap is not merely an oversight in presentation. It reflects a structural absence in the mechanism design. The existing framework provides no mechanism for verifying citation accuracy, no separate incentive for honest attribution, and no penalty for strategic under-citation.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, *Citation Honesty Mechanisms in Weighted Directed Acyclic Graph Governance* (2026), III. The Missing Game-Theoretic Proof, page 8

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Citation Honesty Mechanisms in Weighted Directed Acyclic Graph Governance (2026). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=6269518

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `f096ecf5b41bb9ae8642facd54b9149c7b594de53a1cc32718a4d806b772f88f` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20-%202026%20-%20Citation%20Honesty%20Mechanisms%20in%20Weighted%20Directed%20Acyclic%20Graph%20Governance.pdf

**Failure mode.** absent citation verification layer  (family: reputation-system-gaming)

**Topics.** citation-and-knowledge

**Keywords.** mechanism-design, verification, under-citation, proof-gap

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.