Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) select research projects through transparent, token-governed, and community-driven processes. Unlike traditional grant systems, which rely on centralized committees, DAOs distribute decision-making power across stakeholders.
Proposal Submission
In research-focused DAOs such as VitaDAO or Molecule, researchers submit structured proposals that typically include:
- Research objectives and hypotheses
- Methodology and milestones
- Budget breakdown
- Timeline
- Expected deliverables (e.g., datasets, IP NFTs, publications)
Proposals are published on governance forums or directly on-chain, ensuring transparency 📊.
Community Review & Due Diligence
DAO members—often scientists, token holders, and subject-matter experts—conduct open peer review. This stage may include:
- Scientific feasibility assessment
- Risk analysis
- Alignment with DAO mission
- Financial sustainability
Some DAOs appoint expert working groups or advisory boards to provide technical evaluations before proposals proceed to voting.
On-Chain Governance Voting
After discussion, proposals move to formal voting. Governance tokens represent voting power. Voting mechanisms can vary:
- One-token-one-vote
- Quadratic voting
- Delegated voting
Smart contracts automatically execute funding decisions once quorum and majority thresholds are met ⚙️.
Milestone-Based Funding
Approved projects often receive funds in tranches. Release of subsequent funding depends on:
- Completion of predefined milestones
- Public reporting of results
- Verification by the community or reviewers
This reduces capital risk and enforces accountability.
Alignment Through Incentives
Unlike traditional grants, DAO participants are economically aligned. If the DAO token appreciates due to successful research outcomes (e.g., valuable IP or licensing), stakeholders benefit financially. This creates long-term strategic selection rather than short-term publication incentives.
In summary, DAOs choose research projects through open proposals, community evaluation, token-based governance, and automated execution. The model combines peer review with blockchain transparency, aiming to optimize capital allocation in science 🚀.
👉 But AI Internet-Meritocracy does not require to propose projects for funding. Instead the user just submits his sites and all his/her projects are funded. Support this charity.
👉 Help fund the next public test of AIIM.
Help Test a New Way to Fund Science
AI Internet-Meritocracy (AIIM) is an operational beta designed to allocate available donations to researchers and open-source developers using AI-assisted evaluation of documented contributions. Payment transactions are already recorded on-chain.
The next major evidence milestone is a proposed five-month public adversarial test of the allocation model, with $1,000 distributed to eligible funding recipients. Donations help pay for the development, infrastructure, reviewer and participant recruitment, outreach, and operating work needed to reach and evaluate that milestone.
You do not need to assume AIIM is already proven to support the project. Your donation helps turn the proposal into evidence: what works, what fails, and what should change.
Support the next testing milestone → Read the test proposal →
Independent review
Researchers and technical reviewers: independent criticism is welcome, including negative conclusions. Review AIIM’s assumptions, governance, failure modes, and testing plan →
Research status: AIIM remains experimental. AI-generated evaluations can contain factual errors or biases, and decentralized governance and non-custodial components remain under development. That uncertainty is why public testing, auditability, and external criticism are central to the project.