Charged approaches for decentralized AI services

Compared to uncharged approaches, charged approaches are more straightforward. The major process is that clients compensate service providers through subscription fees. These can be achieved per service request or as a single payment covering monthly or yearly durations. This approach is closely tied to the specific service being provided, as clients usually pay for a singular type of service to access. Although this design is simpler at the system level, with fewer security and economic complexities, there's an important responsibility for the platform: guiding clients to reputable service providers. Some providers might maliciously take clients' funds and later come back online with a new identity to commit fraud repeatedly. Occasional outages, even if unintended, can damage user experiences and decrease trust in the platform. As a result, it's crucial for the system to showcase trustworthy service providers prominently. Although some users might have specific preferences, the system should always highlight reliable service sources. The following table outlines the factors the platform considers when listing service providers, with varying importance depending on the situation.

Factors	Data Structure Types
Customer Rating of Service	float (typically 1-5/1-10)
Total Number of Subscribers	integer (0 to max clients)
Total Number of Tokens Staked	float value ( s )
Types of AI Services Provided	string list ( T )

Customer rating of service is typically represented as a float, indicating a one-star to five-star rating. The types of AI services provided include a string list that indicates the AI services the service provider supports. Like the uncharged approaches, a reputational protocol is also involved. Users are required to rate their service providers by submitting signed ratings to the global ledger. The global ledger then updates the miner's reputation based on these new ratings. Additionally, the coordinator node receives a portion of the payment as transaction fees. These fees typically cover the coordinator's operational costs and rewards but are kept moderate to prevent transaction friction and discourage miners. This fee structure also helps prevent the reward cheating attack mentioned earlier.