Withdraw ₳26,840,000 for Input Output Research (IOR): Cardano Vision - Wor...
183 DReps voted · 52 with a rationale
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes 1.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1M ₳ Rationale
If this goes through (and it should), then the community needs to hold IOR and Intersect to high standards. No more unlimited funding without traction. Milestones need to be heavily questioned by third party experts – not “rubber stamped”.
This is a “must have” research program, ask anyone in the field. Cardano cannot afford to keep funding academic exercises that don't quickly filter into the engineering pipeline and mainnet improvements. The world is moving and we cannot sit on our laurels.
Let's get research that ships.
- Yes 1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 955.2K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 947.9K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 922.9K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 819K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 818K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 810K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 793K ₳ Rationale
Demonstrated ability, methodology, and results that I can hang my hat on. I fully support the IOG core development plan.
- Yes 785.2K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 765.1K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 762.6K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 733.1K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 717.1K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 655K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 654.5K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 624.8K ₳ Rationale
This proposal represents a vital continuation of the research-driven approach that fundamentally defines Cardano's identity and competitive advantage in the blockchain landscape. Input Output Research has been instrumental in delivering Cardano's foundational architecture through rigorous, peer-reviewed methodology, producing over 200 academic papers that established the network's technical credibility and innovative solutions like Ouroboros consensus.
The structured funnel model connecting fundamental research to practical implementation ensures that Cardano maintains its position as a research leader while delivering tangible technological advances. The proposal's 20 research streams and 6 technology validation initiatives across critical areas including scalability, interoperability, and sustainability directly address the long-term challenges facing blockchain adoption and utility.
Cardano's research-first methodology distinguishes it from other Layer 1 platforms that often prioritize rapid deployment over thorough validation. This approach has delivered Cardano's unique architecture, including EUTxO, formal verification capabilities, and proven consensus mechanisms that provide security guarantees other networks cannot match. Abandoning this research foundation would undermine Cardano's core value proposition and competitive positioning.
The five-year Cardano Vision program demonstrates strategic thinking beyond immediate market demands, focusing on breakthrough technologies like quantum-resistant cryptography, advanced zero-knowledge proofs, and next-generation consensus protocols. These innovations require sustained investment and cannot be developed through short-term funding cycles or market-driven approaches alone.
IOR's track record provides strong confidence in delivery capability, with consistent publication output in increasingly competitive academic venues and successful translation of research into production implementations. The rigorous peer-review process ensures quality while building academic credibility that benefits the entire ecosystem.
The technology validation component bridges the gap between theoretical research and practical implementation, producing formal specifications, prototypes, and improvement proposals that enable the broader Cardano community to build upon research foundations. This systematic approach accelerates innovation while maintaining quality standards.
Continued research investment is essential for Cardano to address emerging challenges including quantum computing threats, cross-chain interoperability requirements, and sustainability concerns that will define the next generation of blockchain platforms. Without proactive research, Cardano risks losing its technological edge and narrative leadership.
The proposal's focus on long-horizon research and development ensures Cardano remains ahead of industry trends rather than reactive to market pressures. This strategic positioning enables the network to capture opportunities that require deep technical innovation rather than competing solely on immediate utility metrics.
Supporting this proposal maintains Cardano's research-driven identity while funding the foundational work necessary for continued technological leadership and ecosystem evolution. - Yes 589.2K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 587.1K ₳ Rationale
I recognize that sustained innovation in decentralized systems requires more than just short-term engineering — it demands rigorous foundational research. The IOR Work Program 2025 represents a long-term commitment to scientific integrity, pushing the boundaries of what’s possible in blockchain scalability, interoperability, and security. Technologies like Ouroboros Omega, ZKPs, and quantum-resistant cryptography are not optional enhancements — they’re essential for Cardano’s resilience and competitive edge over the next decade. Funding this proposal supports a structured and transparent research pipeline that is already integrated with peer-reviewed academic standards and feeds directly into real-world protocol development via formal specifications and CIPs.
I acknowledge the high cost associated with this request, but the scope — 20 research streams and 6 validation paths annually — is equally ambitious and foundational. Input Output Research has a proven track record, with over 200 published papers and direct contributions to Cardano’s core architecture. As long as outputs are made accessible and aligned with the wider community's priorities, this proposal delivers significant long-term value. I vote YES, trusting in the strategic importance of deep research to secure Cardano’s technological and philosophical vision.
- No 502K ₳ Rationale
Twenty-seven million ADA for academic papers? I'm sorry, but no. Research is important, but this feels like funding a university department that happens to have Cardano in their mission statement. I've read IOR papers, they're academically rigorous and practically irrelevant.
The disconnect between IOR's theoretical work and what developers actually need in the trenches is honestly frustrating.
We're building a financial system for crying out loud. - Yes 466.2K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 445.1K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 443.5K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 437.8K ₳ Rationale
I’m backing this program because it tackles the big questions; scalability, governance, and consensus; while handing IO’s research know‑how to a growing community of independent developers. The same team that delivered breakthroughs like Ouroboros and Plutus is behind it, so I’m confident it will push Cardano forward and add real depth and credibility to the network.
- Yes 385.6K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 382.6K ₳ No rationale
- No 377.3K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 371.8K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 328.9K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 321.1K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 314.4K ₳ Rationale
In alignment with my voting during the 2025 Cardano Budget Reconciliation process on the Ekklesia platform, I support this withdrawal and therefore vote YES.
In alignment with my voting during the 2025 Cardano Budget Reconciliation process on the Ekklesia platform, I support this withdrawal and therefore vote YES.
- Yes 313.1K ₳ Rationale
I’m voting YES to fund the Cardano Vision 2025. This initiative advances long-term research in scalability, sustainability, and interoperability, providing technical recommendations and prototypes critical for Cardano’s future.
This is consistent with my previous vote signaled on Ekklesia and supports strategic, research-driven innovation for ecosystem growth.
- Yes 298.6K ₳ Rationale
Hell yeah
- Yes 291.3K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 271.5K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 262.3K ₳ No rationale
- Abstain 258.6K ₳ Rationale
🗳 Governance Action Review
Proposal: Withdraw ₳26,840,000 for Input Output Research (IOR): Cardano Vision – Work Program 2025
Vendor: Input Output Research (administered by Intersect)
Governance Action ID: gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzqhm6e8q
Submitted: 18 July 2025
Expires: 17 August 2025
Type: Treasury Withdrawal
Budget Requested: ₳26,840,000
📋 Evaluation Checklist
1️⃣ Ecosystem Essentiality → ✅ Yes
“IOR aims to support research initiatives that deliver value over 3–5 years for the continued growth of the Cardano ecosystem… guided by a Strategic Research Agenda rooted in an Evidence-Based Methodology.”
“Cardano Vision is an ambitious five-year research initiative… [targeting] breakthroughs in critical technologies, including next-generation consensus protocols like Ouroboros Omega, zero-knowledge proofs, quantum-resistant cryptography…”📌 Context:
The proposal covers 20 research streams and 6 validation streams aimed at foundational infrastructure and long-term innovation. These include consensus design, scalability, ZK tech, cryptography, governance, and smart contracts — areas that directly impact Cardano’s roadmap.📌 Strategic Relevance:
While bundling this volume of streams under a single proposal may obscure the strategic weight of each individually, the scope reinforces Cardano’s continued reliance on IOG’s research leadership. The dependency may be undesirable long-term, but its current importance is indisputable.
2️⃣ Budget Structure and Detail → ✅ Yes
“The $13.42M total budget proposed is to finance all activities… with a total of 56.1 FTEs… including all costs such as equipment, licenses, sub-contracting, admin, travel, and program management.”
📌 Breakdown by domain:
- Research Dept. → $5.895M across 27.5 FTEs
- Validation Dept. → $7.525M across 28.6 FTEs
“This equates to an average of $239k per FTE (or $1,030 per day based on 232 working days/year).”
📌 The documents provide breakdowns by department, average workstream cost, and per-FTE allocation, as well as qualitative details about required roles (e.g., Chief Scientist, Cryptographer, PM, Engineer, etc.).
📌 While not granular to the line-item level (e.g., specific audit costs), the cost structure is internally consistent, detailed, and well-justified for a research-focused proposal.
3️⃣ KPIs or Impact Identifiers → 🟡 Partial
📌 Stated Output Goals:
- “20 high-impact research initiatives annually (SRL2), with 6 validated per year (SRL4/5).”
- “At least 20 peer-reviewed publications and technical artefacts per year.”
📌 Per-stream KPIs (in annex):
- Leios: “5x throughput improvement using 85% of network bandwidth.”
- k-parameter reduction: “10¹¹-fold increase in grinding complexity.”
- SPO Incentives: “Achieve 50–60% stake in community pools.”
📌 Analysis:
While several streams define performance-based technical KPIs, many others rely only on general deliverables. There’s no unified system for post-delivery impact measurement, nor aggregate targets for adoption, citations, or implementation rates.⚠️ For a research program of this size, the lack of KPIs tracking downstream utility, adoption, or network integration is a weakness.
4️⃣ Milestones and Deliverables → 🟡 Partial
“Each fundamental research stream runs for ~2 years.”
“Each validation stream receives 6–12 months of effort… frequently spanning two calendar years.”
“All milestones, acceptance criteria and payment terms will be specified in a legal contract with CDH and Intersect.”📌 Stream-level deliverables (listed in annexes) include:
- Formal specifications
- Simulations
- Prototypes
- Technical reports
- CIPs and CPSs
📌 Gaps:
While the annexes outline expected outputs and estimated durations, no start/end dates or milestone deadlines are defined per stream. The delivery framework is expected to be contractually enforced later.📌 Conclusion:
The proposal includes qualitative deliverables and effort estimates, but lacks time-bound milestone planning at submission. For a treasury withdrawal of this magnitude, the absence of explicit timeline commitments weakens transparency and accountability, even if deferred to contract enforcement.
5️⃣ Internal Consistency → ✅ Yes
📌 The requested amount (₳26,840,000) matches metadata and proposal descriptions.
📌 Referenced budget info action and Treasury Reserve Smart Contract details are coherent.
📌 No discrepancies were found between budget anchors, figures, or process descriptions.
6️⃣ Team Visibility & Track Record → ✅ Yes
“IOR is the leading blockchain academic group… over 200 peer-reviewed, published papers… more than 150 academics… 50 papers core to Cardano's five development phases.”
📌 The proposal provides institutional credibility and historical performance by Input Output Research.
📌 Importantly, named stream leads are disclosed in the annex, enabling independent due diligence. Examples include:
- Bernardo David, Daniel Fritz, Matheus Ferreira, Philipp Kant, Marek Mahut, among others — many with longstanding IOG affiliations and peer-reviewed research output.
🔎 Independent verification confirms that listed leads are qualified researchers with demonstrable domain experience, strengthening the case for credibility.
7️⃣ Conflict of Interest → ✅ No conflict
The evaluator declares no personal, financial, or formal ties to the vendor (IOR) or any entities involved in the administration of this Governance Action. No abstention is warranted.
🗳 Voting Recommendation: 🔵 ABSTAIN
Rationale:
Despite the strategic relevance and technical merit of this proposal, the following concerns justify abstention at this time:
- The number and granularity of KPIs are insufficient to properly evaluate research adoption, utility, or downstream integration.
- Milestones and deliverables are not bound to dates, weakening accountability for a large-scale treasury withdrawal.
- The bundling of 26 distinct streams into a single action creates opacity and reinforces dependency on a single vendor.
A revised submission with stronger KPI structures, milestone accountability, and modular proposal design would provide higher confidence for a YES vote in the future.
- Yes 257K ₳ Rationale
After a thorough review of the Input Output Research (IOR) Cardano Vision - Work Program 2025 proposal and all supporting documentation, I am voting YES for the following key reasons:
Alignment with Cardano’s Strategic Roadmap and Vision
The proposal directly supports multiple priority areas in the 2025 Cardano Product Roadmap, including Developer/User Experience, Scaling the Layer 1 Engine, Architectural Excellence, Leios, Layer 2 Expansion, SPO Incentive Improvements, Multiple Node Implementations, Incoming Liquidity, and Programmable Assets.
The multi-year Cardano Vision research agenda underpins foundational scientific breakthroughs essential to Cardano’s sustained leadership in blockchain innovation, ensuring the ecosystem’s competitiveness and resilience for years to come.Comprehensive, Evidence-Based Research Program
IOR proposes a rigorous, systematic research funnel delivering over 20 peer-reviewed academic papers annually, along with prioritized, technology-validated development streams. This methodical approach balances fundamental blockchain science with real-world technical validation, advancing both theory and practice, a critical capability unique and indispensable for Cardano’s ecosystem.Experienced and Credible Team
Input Output Research has demonstrated extensive prior success with a track record of over 200 published academic papers and pivotal contributions to Cardano’s architecture and protocol innovations (e.g., Ouroboros consensus, Hydra, Mithril). The team includes multidisciplinary experts in distributed systems, cryptography, game theory, and formal methods, instilling confidence in delivery and quality.Transparent Budget and Resource Allocation
The requested funding of approximately ₳26.8 million (USD $13.42M equivalent) covers 56 full-time equivalents spanning research, technology validation, administration, dissemination, and stakeholder engagement. This seems reasonable and proportional for the scope and impact of work outlined, especially given the high cost and complexity of blockchain R&D.Community Engagement and Dissemination
IOR commits to robust communication and knowledge sharing with the broader Cardano ecosystem, including SPOs, developers, DReps, and committees. They aim to operationalize open frameworks for academic visibility, collaborative cross-team research, and public availability of insights and artifacts, thus maximizing ecosystem benefit.Governance and Oversight
The proposal is under the appropriate oversight mechanisms, with designated administration and contractual safeguards aligned with Cardano treasury governance expectations, ensuring a structured, accountable execution process.Risks Well-Considered and Mitigated
Dependencies between research streams and technology validation projects are acknowledged and managed within the proposal, reducing risk of bottlenecks. The focus on multi-year sustained funding further mitigates resource continuity risk which is essential in complex academic research cycles.Summary:
Input Output Research’s Cardano Vision program for 2025 is a vital, strategic investment in Cardano’s long-term technical foundation and market leadership. By advancing cutting-edge scalable consensus protocols, novel cryptographic constructs, governance innovations, and interoperability research, it ensures that Cardano stays at the forefront of blockchain technology evolution. The proposal is well-aligned with community priorities, fiscally sensible, and backed by a proven team committed to rigorous academic standards and ecosystem transparency. I support its funding to maintain Cardano’s path of unparalleled research-driven progress. - Yes 252.6K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 245K ₳ No rationale
- No 238.6K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 208.6K ₳ Rationale
If someone can deliver quality research, it is The Input Output Research (IOR) arm. This seems like a good investment.
- Yes 190.2K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 184.4K ₳ Rationale
I am voting yes on all 39 Intersect Governance actions. The community has thoroughly reviewed the many proposals presented in the Intersect Budget Process for the 2025 budget. I was deeply involved in the entire process as an SME for the Budget Committee, and then as the Secretary for the Budget Committee.
The proposals presented represent an incredible amount of development for our ecosystem for the next year. The teams all received at least 50% on Ekklesia polling. The teams will face milestones in order to continue to receive funding. If a team fails to deliver, the process will stop them from enriching themselves without returning value.
If anything, we are spending too little on our community. We need to spend more to further develop our governance and our organized events. This is a liquid democracy. If you believe that all of these proposals deserve a chance to deliver, you can shift your delegation to my DRep ID.
- Yes 180.9K ₳ No rationale
- No 177.6K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 143.9K ₳ No rationale
- Yes 137.3K ₳ No rationale