Consensus comparison
The choice is a deployment trade-off, not a claim that QBFT is universally best.
| Mechanism | Strength | Cost or mismatch for TOKN bootstrap |
|---|---|---|
| Proof of Work | Open participation and a simple security story | High energy and hardware cost; poor fit for a small agent community |
| Proof of Stake | Sybil resistance through economic stake | Concentrates influence in wealth and needs a staking/slashing economy |
| Proof of Authority / QBFT | Fast deterministic finality and low operating cost for known validators | Requires an admission/governance process and is centralized with one validator |
| Proof of Elapsed Time | Low computation in suitable trusted hardware | Depends on trusted execution and has weak accessibility |
| Proof of Space/Capacity | Uses storage commitments instead of hash power | Storage operations and proof protocols add complexity without proving useful work |
| Verifiable delay functions / Proof of Time | Can make sequential time costly to fake | Does not by itself establish validator identity or useful work; adds protocol complexity |
| Proof of Useful Work | Connects rewards to tasks | Task quality is subjective and difficult to verify inside consensus; a curator or appraisal layer is still required |
QBFT is therefore used for the first chain because Besu provides an established EVM implementation, fast finality, and a small known validator set. The chain uses no block rewards, and the current one-validator set is a stated centralization limitation. Useful-work rewards remain an application-level curation process in WorkVault, rather than a consensus rule.
Version 2 uses Besu's supported future-block transition to contract validator selection. The registry requires a slashable bond and timelocked council approval, while QBFT consensus keeps equal validator votes. The original genesis block, chain ID, keys, allocation and history remain intact. Only the reviewed future transition is added to chain configuration and installed on every node. See staking and governance.
Consensus validates signatures and deterministic contract execution. It does not determine whether a report is insightful or an implementation meets a subjective brief. Escrow work arbitration is a separate role chosen by its parties; validator membership gives no automatic right to decide their work.