Swimming with Whales: Analysis of Power Imbalances in Stake-Weighted Governance

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.19264v1
• Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 02:25:16 GMT
• Title: Swimming with Whales: Analysis of Power Imbalances in Stake-Weighted Governance
• Abstract summary: We study the extent of power imbalances in stake-weighted voting when power is quantified using the Penrose-Banzhaf power index.<n>We provide a more fine-grained understanding of the power imbalances that are likely to occur in current stake-weighted governance systems.
• Score: 5.035430470663085
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Voting methods weighted by stakes are the fundamental governance paradigm in Proof-of-Stake (PoS) blockchains. Such a paradigm is known to be prone to power distortions: a few users possessing large stakes may completely control decision making, even without owning the totality of the stakes. We study this phenomenon through the lens of computational social choice, focusing on the extent of power imbalances in stake-weighted voting when power is quantified using the Penrose-Banzhaf power index. Our work presents both analytical and empirical contributions. Analytically, we demonstrate that while a perfect alignment between power and relative stake ownership is generally unattainable, it can be approximated in expectation under specific conditions. Empirically, using data from a real-world on-chain governance system (Project Catalyst), we provide a more fine-grained understanding of the power imbalances that are likely to occur in current stake-weighted governance systems.

Related papers

• Concave is the New Linear: The Impossibility of Anti-Plutocratic DAO Governance [0.0]
  Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) run protocol governance by letting token holders vote on proposals.<n>The dominant rule, voting power proportional to wallet balance, concentrates control among a small number of large holders.<n>We show that no voting rule that derives power solely from wallet balance can succeed on a permissionless blockchain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T18:10:52Z)
• Trustworthy AI Suffers from Invariance Conflicts and Causality is The Solution [80.98492754957466]
  Core trustworthy AI objectives, such as fairness, robustness, privacy, and explainability, are hard to achieve simultaneously.<n>This paper argues that causality is necessary to understand and balance trade-offs in performance and multiple objectives of trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-04T14:26:28Z)
• Prediction Laundering: The Illusion of Neutrality, Transparency, and Governance in Polymarket [17.356126657763806]
  This paper presents a qualitative sociotechnical audit of Polymarket (N = 27), combining digital ethnography, interpretive walkthroughs, and semi-structured interviews.<n>We show how subjective, high-uncertainty bets, strategic hedges, and capital-heavy whale activity are stripped of their original noise through algorithmic aggregation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-05T01:19:25Z)
• Toward a Sustainable Federated Learning Ecosystem: A Practical Least Core Mechanism for Payoff Allocation [71.86087908416255]
  We introduce a payoff allocation framework based on the least core (LC) concept.<n>Unlike traditional methods, the LC prioritizes the cohesion of the federation by minimizing the maximum dissatisfaction.<n>Case studies in federated intrusion detection demonstrate that our mechanism correctly identifies pivotal contributors and strategic alliances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T11:10:50Z)
• Consensus Power Inequality: A Comparative Study of Blockchain Networks [0.0]
  This study provides a rigorous evaluation of consensus power inequality across five prominent blockchain networks.<n>A robust dataset, capturing network-specific characteristics, forms the foundation of analysis.<n>Through an in-depth comparative study, the paper identifies key disparities in consensus power distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-17T10:45:41Z)
• Decentralization in PoS Blockchain Consensus: Quantification and Advancement [10.679753825744964]
  This study quantifies the decentralization of consensus mechanisms in proof-of-stake (PoS) blockchains.<n>We introduce two alternative weighting models for PoS consensus: Square Root Stake Weight (SRSW) and Logarithmic Stake Weight (LSW)<n>Results demonstrate that SRSW and LSW models improve decentralization metrics by an average of 51% and 132%, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-19T16:33:30Z)
• Sequential Manipulation Against Rank Aggregation: Theory and Algorithm [119.57122943187086]
  We leverage an online attack on the vulnerable data collection process. From the game-theoretic perspective, the confrontation scenario is formulated as a distributionally robust game. The proposed method manipulates the results of rank aggregation methods in a sequential manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T03:31:21Z)
• How Does Stake Distribution Influence Consensus? Analyzing Blockchain Decentralization [10.679753825744964]
  This study first formalizes decentralization metrics for weighted consensus mechanisms. We introduce the Square Root Stake Weight (SRSW) model, which effectively recalibrates staking weight distribution. This research is a pivotal step toward a more fair and equitable distribution of staking weight, advancing the decentralization in blockchain consensus mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-21T15:32:20Z)
• Causal Fairness Analysis [68.12191782657437]
  We introduce a framework for understanding, modeling, and possibly solving issues of fairness in decision-making settings. The main insight of our approach will be to link the quantification of the disparities present on the observed data with the underlying, and often unobserved, collection of causal mechanisms. Our effort culminates in the Fairness Map, which is the first systematic attempt to organize and explain the relationship between different criteria found in the literature.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-23T01:06:34Z)
• Balanced Q-learning: Combining the Influence of Optimistic and Pessimistic Targets [74.04426767769785]
  We show that specific types of biases may be preferable, depending on the scenario. We design a novel reinforcement learning algorithm, Balanced Q-learning, in which the target is modified to be a convex combination of a pessimistic and an optimistic term.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-03T07:30:19Z)
• Counterfactual Representation Learning with Balancing Weights [74.67296491574318]
  Key to causal inference with observational data is achieving balance in predictive features associated with each treatment type. Recent literature has explored representation learning to achieve this goal. We develop an algorithm for flexible, scalable and accurate estimation of causal effects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-23T19:06:03Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.