Whaleshares Logo

Curation Maximisation Explained - Part 1

scipioPosted for Everyone to comment on, 5 years ago6 min read

Curation Maximisation Explained - Part 1

math.jpg

Hello, Whaleshares!

Curation Rewards… indeed a difficult topic, yet one that deserves to be explained. In this post, I will try to do so using both math and computational curation examples, and present this as easy as possible, yet without obfuscating (or completely leaving behind) essential curation rewards formula variables. Understanding the curation formula is one of the most complex topics on Whaleshares, and if you currently don’t understand it (well) then please don’t feel ignorant, because - trust me - 99% of people (including those on the Steem platform) doesn’t really understand it either.

Having said that, let’s dive right in!

The Curation Rewards Formula

The Whaleshares Blockchain uses a fairly complex method based on the current reward pool parameters and size, to “split” rewards on a post into -a- author rewards and -b- curation rewards. And because the Whaleshares blockchain is forked from Steem HF19, that “splitting of rewards” even begins with curation rewards, not author rewards. Meaning: it begins with the total value of a post, then computes curation rewards for everybody who voted on it, and what’s left is given to the author as author rewards. At least 75% of the total post value goes to the author and 25% at maximum goes to the “curators” having voted on a post.

The same curation formula can be written in multiple forms, of which I will mention and explain 2:

-1-

cur = K * v * t * sqrt(s)

where
K = [1 - (sqrt(1-k))] / 4k
and
k = v / P1 = v / (P0 + v)

and
s = PT/P1

and therefore

-2-

cur = 0.25 * sqrt(PT) * (sqrt(P1) - sqrt(P0)) * t

Does this look difficult? Yes it does. I’ve taken this directly from the blockchain C++ code and had to carefully examine the parameters myself as well, prior to understanding them, but having done so now allows me to explain it to all of you.

If we look at the formulae, cur is of course your curation rewards.
PT is the total, FINAL value of a post, right before the post payout. The Payout Total
P1 is the value of a post immediately AFTER YOU have added your own vote to it
P0 is the value of a post RIGHT BEFORE YOU have voted on it
v is the value of your own vote, in WLS
t is the “time” value, which is 0 the second a post is published, then grows linearly between 0 and 1,800 seconds (= 30 minutes) to 1, and stays 1 until post payout.
sqrt has nothing to do with a female orgasm (sorry, math is not that exciting unfortunately) but is short for square root.
k has to do with the scale of how much your own vote has grown the post value at the moment you have voted on a post
K is pretty difficult to understand as it’s not directly in the original curation formula, but it’s a hyperbole always ranging between 0.125 and 0.25. The higher, the better, seen from your own perspective.
s has to do with the scale growth of the post payout after you have voted until post payout. This is straightforward to understand, which is why I rewrote the base formula (#2) using the (hard to understand) K derived variable, so that s is shown “naked”.

Example 1

Let’s say some Trending #1 post at payout time has a value of a staggering 1,000 WLS (= PT).
You found that post late (e.g. 3 days after it was published) so t = 1.
At the moment you found it, the post value was already 900 WLS (= P0).
Your own vote was 10 WLS (= v), meaning that right after you voted the post value was at 900 + 10 = 910 WLS (= P1).
(And after you voted, the post value increased with another 90 WLS (910 WLS + 90 WLS = 1,000 WLS, = PT).

If we now substitute all these example values into the second formula, then we can compute your own curation rewards:

cur = 0.25 * sqrt(PT) * (sqrt(P1) - sqrt(P0)) * t

ergo:

cur = 0.25 * sqrt(1000) * ( sqrt(910) - sqrt(900) ) * 1
cur = 1.314

So: you voted on that post with 10 WLS and its curation rewards are 1.314, about 13.14% of your vote value.
As the post grew in value AFTER you voted on it from 910 WLS to 1,000 WLS, the scale growth s after your vote is s = 1,000 / 910 = 1.099.
The value k is 10 / 910 = 0.011 (meaning your own vote of 10 WLS is “tiny” compared to the 900 WLS already voted on that post right before you voted on it) and therefore K = (1 - (sqrt(1-k))) / 4k leads to K = (1 - sqrt(1-0.011)) / 4 * 0.011, ergo K = (1 - 0.994) / 0.044 = 0.1253 <== because your own vote (10 WLS) was tiny compared to P0 (900 WLS) the value of K is close to its minimum value of 0.125.

cur = K * v * t * sqrt(s) in this case leads to cur = 0.1253 * 10 * 1 * sqrt(1.099) = 1.314 (= the same result as we computed before.)

Example 2

Now say you found a post, also 3 days old, that nobody voted on yet: P0 = 0.
You vote on it with v = 10 WLS so P1 = 10, and afterwards nobody else votes on it, leaving P1 = PT = 10 WLS as the final value.

What does this mean for your own curation rewards? This is simple: you get the full 25% curation rewards, which in this case equals 25% of your own vote: 2.5 WLS.

cur = 0.25 * sqrt(PT) * (sqrt(P1) - sqrt(P0)) * t

so:

cur = 0.25 * sqrt(10) * ( sqrt(10) - sqrt(0) ) * 1
cur = 0.25 * 10 * 1
cur = 2.5

In this case the value of s remains 1 as s = PT/P1 and s = 10/10 = 1: the post value did not grow after you voted.
The value of k is v / P1 = 10 / 10 = 1 and therefore K = [1 - (sqrt(1-k))] / 4k means K = (1 - sqrt(0)) / 4 * 1 so K = 1/4 = 0.25, the maximum value of K.

cur = K * v * t * sqrt(s) means cur = 0.25 * 10 * 1 * 1 = 2.5

Concluding: YOU earn more, almost double, if you’re the only one voting on a post compared to if you’re (almost) last to vote on a highly rewarded post.

Did nobody fall asleep? ;-) Feel free to ask questions, in the comments!

For now, thanks for your time!

Kind regards, @scipio

Sign Up to join this conversation, or to start a topic of your own.
Your opinion is celebrated and welcomed, not banned or censored!