|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
If you’re looking for decentralized crowdfunding specifically targeted at scientific experiments, there are a number of emerging platforms and models — particularly in the “DeSci” (decentralised science) movement — that might interest you. Below are a few, with notes about how they work, their fit for your interests (math/blockchain/research funding) and important caveats.
✅ Notable Services/Platforms
- DESCi
- A blockchain-based crowdfunding platform oriented around scientific research. Investors/supporters contribute via a token (“Desci”) which is then allocated to research projects. Medium+2Stanford Law School+2
- Pros: Designed explicitly for scientific research, uses tokens to align funding with outcomes (profit sharing, community incentives). Medium+1
- Cons: As of now, still relatively nascent; you’ll want to check region/regulation, tokenomics, governance (especially if you’re raising ~$64K+ as you plan).
- Fit for you: High, given your interest in blockchain + science funding.
- Experiment.com
- A more traditional “crowdfunding for science” platform (not strictly blockchain/decentralised) which allows researchers to post projects for backers to support. Experiment – Moving Science Forward+1
- Pros: Established in the science-crowdfunding niche; good for reaching public backers who care about research.
- Cons: Not inherently decentralised in the sense of token/DAO governance; less aligned with “crypto / DeSci” mechanisms.
- Fit: Moderate – good as a complementary channel if you also want to tap non-crypto audiences.
- The DeSci movement / ecosystem more broadly
- Articles discuss how decentralised science invests in research via DAOs (Decentralised Autonomous Organisations), tokens, open governance, public participation. PMC+2The Block+2
- For example, one piece: “Unlocking Scientific Innovation Through Decentralised Science” describes the model of connecting researchers + stakeholders + funders via blockchain. Stanford Law School
- Pros: Theoretically very aligned with your vision of a science funding ecosystem, crypto + blockchain + global reach.
- Cons: Still emerging; many platforms/projects may be experimental themselves; regulatory/crypto risk, token value risk, overhead in governance etc.
- A few underlying tech/academic proposals
- For instance, “Quantinar: a blockchain p2p ecosystem for honest scientific research” is an academic proposal for a decentralised ecosystem supporting research. arXiv
- While not a ready-to-use crowdfunding service, this illustrates the direction of research and how you might architect your funding model.
⚠️ Key considerations and risks (especially relevant for you as someone raising funds and working at the intersection of blockchain + science)
- Regulation & tokens: If you’re issuing or using tokens (as in DESCi or DAO-based fundraising) you’ll want to check whether the token is considered a security in the jurisdiction(s) you operate (you mentioned equity crowdfunding already). Token-based crowdfunding carries additional regulatory complexity vs. “donation/backer” crowdfunding.
- Transparency/impact tracking: One of the advantages of blockchain in research funding is the ability to track flows, governance, impact. The literature emphasises this. PMC+1 For you, given your high ambition (global funding, metrics), this might be a strong selling point.
- Audience / community building: Decentralised science funding works better when there is a community of backers/investors who understand crypto, tokens, research risk. If you only target more traditional backers, you might find friction.
- Platform maturity / fees / governance: Check the platform’s fee structure, governance model (who decides which experiments get funded), what rights/backer benefits you or contributors get.
- Fit with your vision: Since you are building a developer-facing ecosystem (IC Pack etc) and raising large sums ($64K+ SEO etc), you might want a hybrid model: a blockchain/DAO structure + traditional crowdfunding as backup.
- Reputation / credibility: In scientific funding, reputation matters (peer review, publication, etc.). If you’re crowdfunding an experiment, being clear about methodology, results, deliverables will help attract backers.
🔍 My recommendation for your next step
Given your profile (mathematics + blockchain + building a funding/DAO ecosystem), I suggest the following:
- Investigate DESCi deeply: Contact them (if possible) to understand their onboarding, legal/regulatory stance, how projects are selected, tokenomics.
- Consider launching your own DAO or campaign: Because you are already raising funds and building a platform, you might initiate your project under your own DAO or sub-DAO: you can incorporate a crowdfunding campaign where backers get tokens/rights. The DeSci literature backs this model.
- Use a hybrid model: While you set up the decentralised mechanism, you could also run on a more traditional science crowdfunding platform (e.g., Experiment.com) to widen your reach beyond crypto-native investors.
- Frame your experiment clearly: Since you are developing “discontinuous analysis” for arbitrary functions in mathematics (per your bio), you will need to create clear deliverables, milestones, maybe open-source code/results. That will appeal to the kind of DeSci backers who want transparency.
- Integration with your ecosystem: Tie the research campaign into your larger vision (IC Pack, open science funding, global grant networks). Use token incentives or recognition for backers/investors, maybe integrate with your platform’s own token, if you have one.
🔬 Notable DeSci / Decentralized-Science Funding Platforms & Projects
| Platform / Project | Description / What They Do |
|---|---|
| VitaDAO | A DeSci “DAO” funding early-stage longevity / biotech research. Members hold a governance token (VITA), vote on which projects to fund, and collectively own IP-tokens for funded research. VitaDAO+2CoinGecko+2 |
| Molecule | A protocol / platform for decentralized biotech funding and IP tokenization. Scientists and institutions can put forward research proposals; successful ones get funding, with resulting IP represented via tokenized assets (IP-NFTs / IPTs). Molecule+2Tech.eu+2 |
| BIO Protocol | A more recent, broad DeSci infrastructure initiative (backed by crypto institutional investors). It aims to create a network of “BioDAOs”—communities focused on different scientific/biotech domains—where community members can fund, govern, and share ownership of scientific IP and biotech projects. Binance+2Bybit Learn+2 |
| ResearchHub | A platform for open-access scientific publishing, peer review, and funding; researchers and contributors get rewarded with a native token (ResearchCoin, RSC). It supports crowdfunding for scientific projects and embodies the open-science aspects of DeSci. Mitosis University+2ResearchHub+2 |
| DeSciCommons | A community-driven initiative to build common infrastructure for DeSci; aims to rewrite research funding and publication protocols using blockchain and Web3 tooling, to support decentralized science at scale. Decentralized Science Commons |
| FunDeSci | A platform described as a decentralized NFT-based science-funding marketplace where research projects can be represented as NFTs, allowing crowdfunding and trading of research outputs / IP, and providing an alternative funding path for early-career or independent researchers. Gitcoin Checker+1 |
| Traditional / “Open-Science” crowdfunding platforms (e.g. Experiment.com) | Not blockchain-based, but still relevant: Experiment.com allows researchers to post projects and receive backer pledges for scientific experiments. While not decentralized in the blockchain sense, such platforms remain a valid option for crowd-funded experiments. Wikipedia+1 |
| “Commons / Open Knowledge / Open-Source” crowdfunding platforms (e.g. Goteo)** | Goteo supports projects generating public goods: open source, open knowledge, shared data — which can include scientific / research-oriented projects. Funding is via donations or contributions, not tokenization, but still serves as a decentralized (community-driven) alternative to institutional grants. Wikipedia |
⚙️ What Differentiates These Platforms (Models & Mechanisms)
- DAO / Tokenized Governance & Funding: Platforms like VitaDAO, Molecule, BIO Protocol rely on decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) structures. Contributors fund research in exchange for governance tokens or IP-tokens. This allows from-the-ground governance (community votes) and shared ownership of research output or IP. CoinGecko+2Binance+2
- IP Tokenization / IP-NFTs / IPTs: Particularly in biotech-oriented platforms (Molecule, BIO Protocol), research results — datasets, discoveries, patents — can be tokenized. This makes them tradable, investable, and shared globally. The Block+2Binance+2
- Open Publishing + Reward Systems: Some platforms (e.g., ResearchHub) emphasise open science: open-access publication, open peer review, reward mechanisms (tokens) for contributions. This shifts science toward transparency and inclusivity. ResearchHub+2ethereum.org+2
- Hybrid / Non-crypto Crowdfunding: Older or non-crypto crowdfunding platforms (Experiment.com, Goteo) still offer a decentralized funding path (via the crowd) even without blockchain, which may suit some research types especially outside biotech or token-driven IP-heavy areas. Wikipedia+2Wikipedia+2
📌 Notes on the State of the Field
- The term “DeSci” encompasses a diverse, still-evolving ecosystem. Many of the platforms are experimental or new; the overall space is growing but not yet as stable / institutionalized as traditional research funding. The Block+2Bitstamp+2
- Regulatory / IP / Legal complexity: In tokenizing IP or funding via tokens/DAOs, legal/regulation issues (especially across jurisdictions) remain nontrivial. Platforms often caution on this. PANews+2Bybit Learn+2
- Diversity of scientific domains supported: While many DeSci platforms focus on biotech / life sciences (because IP and potential monetization incentives are strong), some support open science more broadly (publishing, data sharing, open research) — which may suit mathematics, theoretical research, or open computational science. ResearchHub+2GitHub+2
- Still early adoption: As of 2025, DeSci remains a nascent movement; some platforms are mature-ish (e.g., VitaDAO, Molecule), others are experimental, and many researchers / institutions remain cautious or outside the movement. Ailurus Bio+2Binance+2