Omniousdocs
Market integrity◆ Points era

The three verdicts

Upheld slashes the provider and pays the challenger. Rejected burns the stake. Ambiguous unwinds everything.

Every challenge resolves to exactly one of three verdicts, and each verdict moves value in a fixed, published way. Nothing about the outcome is discretionary except the verdict itself.

✓ Upheld: the receipt was dishonest

  • The challenger's stake unlocks, fully returned.
  • The provider is slashed max(250 bps, 25x the receipt's net earn) off its points ledger.
  • Half the slash is paid to the challenger as the bounty. The other half is burned, credited to no one.
  • The provider's model claim is quarantined: it stops serving traffic until restored. See Provider bonds & quarantine.

✕ Rejected: the provider was honest

  • The challenger's stake is forfeited: burned, not paid to anyone.
  • The provider is untouched, and its trust record resets to honest.

The asymmetry is deliberate. If rejected stakes were paid to the accused provider, a provider could challenge itself through a friendly wallet and farm its accusers. Burning the forfeit keeps false accusations costly without making honesty a revenue stream for anybody.

~ Ambiguous: the evidence did not decide it

  • The stake unlocks. No slash, no bounty, no forfeit.
  • A warning lands on the provider's trust record.
  • The receipt becomes challengeable again, so better evidence can retry what a weak filing could not prove.
why three verdicts and not twoA binary verdict forces the judge to punish someone on thin evidence: either an honest provider or an honest challenger. The ambiguous outcome makes "not proven" safe to say, which keeps both sides willing to participate while the evidence tooling matures.

Vocabulary, precisely

Stake is what a challenger locks to file. Slash is the provider penalty on uphold. Bounty is the challenger's half of the slash. Forfeit is a rejected challenger's burned stake. Bond is separate: the collateral a provider posts on a model claim in the first place. The words are used identically in the wire formats, the code, and the glossary.

As a challengerYour worst case is always known before you sign: the quoted stake. Your best case is half the slash, which scales with the receipt you caught.
As a providerOnly upheld hurts you, and upheld requires evidence that survives an adversarial filing and a resolution. Serve what you claim and the lane is a defense, not a threat.
where this lives in code