Zurück zu Veröffentlichungen
12 Min. Lesezeit
Whitepaper Draft
Versioniert. v4 (2026-05-08), v3 (2026-03), v2 (2024-04-20), v1 (2024-04-04), mit v0 (Lagrange) als Referenz.
Living document. Pick a version below : latest is selected by default. Earlier drafts are preserved for provenance, with editorial annotations wherever a draft conflicts with the current, locked posture. Only v4 describes ƒxyz as it is.
v4 : 2026-05-08
"Don't trust, verify."
The world is interconnected by data. Complex systems form intricate networks. Money moves through networks. Finance moves through networks. Banks, exchanges, OTC desks, correspondent chains, stablecoin issuers, central banks, payment-system operators, P2P markets : all of it. They share the same structure: nodes connected by rates, by trust, by regulation. But the pipes don't see each other. Each one operates blind to the others. ƒxyz holds the union.
The original whitepaper (v1 and v2 in this archive) framed this as a multiplex network the modern financial system needs to be computed as. The intuition is unchanged. What is different is two years of building.
What changed since the 2024 draft
Lagrange's USDL became Florin : a multi-currency unit of account, collateral-backed, on Solana mainnet. The LAG governance token became House of Wisdom (HoW, ℏ) : allocated and earned, not sold. The Loyalty Reward formula became the Joule emission curve, on the same intuition: contribution × time.
Serum, FTX, and TerraUSD all collapsed in 2022. The team lost capital and lost the venue the entire architecture rested on. What survived was the thesis: the graph. The trading layer was a dependency. The graph was the architecture.
The legal vehicle moved from Cayman to the EU. Members onboarded. Three contribution units deployed. The DAO + Holacracy hybrid is shipped, not theoretical.
The thesis
The financial system is already a multiplex network. The same actors meet across many relationship types : settlement, contribution, governance, knowledge, identity : and the structure of one layer constrains the others. Treating these as separate problems is convenient. It is also wrong.
Padgett & Ansell (1993) showed it for fifteenth-century Florence: the Medici won by strategically segregating their multiplex ties : marriage, patronage, partnership, debt : not by maximising any single network. Mitchell (1969) formalized the same intuition for African urban kinship a generation earlier. Kivelä et al. (2014) provide the modern mathematics. ƒxyz did not invent multiplex networks. ƒxyz is applying a fifty-year body of work to financial infrastructure.
The graph is not the product. The product is what the substrate makes possible: a route that didn't exist, a price that was hidden, a contribution that became measurable, a vote that had standing.
What we do
We map all the closed networks of finance as one substrate. We run functions over that substrate : finding routes, detecting where value is out of sync, scoring contribution, weighting governance. We grow the substrate by introduction, not by acquisition. Each member opens networks the substrate alone could not reach.
We hold no member value. Members keep their own custody. The system computes, proves, and routes; it never possesses.
What we don't do
These are architectural exclusions, not legal hedges. Each constrains what the system can be used for and what it cannot fail at.
- Not an exchange. No exchange-style matching engine.
- Not a custodian. No member-fund treasury.
- Not a fund. No pooled investment vehicle.
- Not a payment processor. Operates only for members.
- Not a quote service. Returns routes.
- Not equity. Tokens are utility-classified contribution units.
- We do not promise yield, APY, ROI, dividends, passive income, or earnings.
- We do not retain user funds or data without an explicit, auditable agreement.
- We do not store or display real personal names or personal email addresses anywhere.
Members and identity
The identity model nests:
HumanBeing → LegalPerson → OnlineID → Persona → Member
A human can hold multiple legal personhoods. A legal person can hold multiple online identifiers. An online identity can host multiple personas. A persona is what acts in the network. Members are personas with credentials.
Privacy is a property of the identity, not the data:
- Public. Disclosed.
- Pseudonymous. Stable handle without disclosure.
- Anonymous. Credentials present, holder absent.
We never store real names or personal emails. KYC happens through Bridge.xyz; the network never sees the documents, only the approved/rejected status. Each member receives a generated mailbox scoped to the network : not a personal email, no identifier leakage.
Tokens
Three Solana mainnet mints. Token-2022 standard.
Florin (ƒ) is the unit of account. A multi-currency, collateral-backed basket. It is how value is denominated across the graph.
Joule is the contribution unit. Emitted by verified work × time, with a diversity adjustment that penalises concentration and a mass-conserving vesting transform (180-day window) on pending contributions. The transformed mass flows into ƒxyz conviction inflow (Formula B). Joule is not a return product. It is the unit we use to measure collective effort.
House of Wisdom (HoW, ℏ) is the governance unit. Proposals consume it. Votes weigh it. Parameter changes burn it. It is allocated and earned. It is never bought.
The three combine by weighted magnitude times breadth : the weighted sum of the three balances, multiplied by a diversity bonus that rewards contributing across all three rather than concentrating in one. Balanced contribution outscores narrow contribution, and adding contribution on any axis always raises the score. The synthesis is in the operational code; members can recompute their own score.
This replaced an earlier constant-elasticity-of-substitution core on 2026-07-04. That formula was retired because it was not monotone : adding real contribution on a weak axis could lower a member's score, and an honest broad contributor could lose to a narrow one. The current form is monotone and never zeroes a specialist.
Tokenomics, locked at v4.1
| Allocation | Share | Vesting | |---|---|---| | Retroactive anchors (the two founding anchors) | 20% | 7-year, 12-month cliff | | Seed / investor round | 10% | per agreement, cliff-then-linear | | Contribution emission (earned by members over a 20-year schedule) | 70% | emitted as contribution happens |
- Minimum allocation: $50K. Locked.
- Allocation vesting: per schedule, cliff-then-linear. No early-exit forfeiture penalty.
- Emission trigger: July 1, 2026. Locked.
Holacracy and DAO governance
Holacracy gives us roles, accountabilities, and structured grievance handling without a hierarchy. The DAO gives us on-chain proposal execution.
We run them together. Roles are defined in the graph and queryable. Proposals begin in Holacracy circles, get ratified on-chain, and execute as code where the proposal is executable. The full constitutional text lives on the docs site.
Privacy and cryptography
Where conventional finance asks for trust between counterparties, ƒxyz uses cryptographic primitives both parties accept: signatures for intent, on-chain anchoring for finality, zero-knowledge attestations for compliance proofs without identity leakage, threshold signatures for collective custody. Trust is not eliminated : it is moved from "trust this counterparty" to "trust this math."
- Encryption is identity-aware. An anonymous persona's data is encrypted such that even the network operator cannot deanonymize it without consent or legal compulsion.
- Selective disclosure is the default. A credential proves a property : ring tier, KYC-verified, not-sanctioned : without revealing the value of any other property.
- Zero-knowledge where the operational cost is justified: credential proofs, attribute-based access, multi-party computation for sensitive aggregations. We do not zk what does not need it.
Financial cartography
The whole system is a graph and we treat it as one. Every concept : currency, counterparty, instrument, route, regulation, member : is a node. Every relationship between them is a typed edge. The same vocabulary, FIBO, that the EDM Council maintains for major banks and regulators is the spine; we extend it where finance is moving (programmable money, contribution layers, multiplex relations) without forking the parts that are stable.
Patterns are everywhere; the work is identifying them. A minimum node count is needed for patterns to emerge. The goal is to move from mazes to structured trees in pattern analysis. Routing, arbitrage, AML detection, governance traversal : every algorithm is a function over this graph, with graph-typed inputs and outputs.
The graph is the version-tracked substrate of canonical claims. When a claim is superseded, both the old and the new remain queryable.
What is live, in plain English
- Three contribution tokens deployed on Solana mainnet.
- Routing engine that finds shortest paths and arbitrage cycles across the corridor graph.
- Contribution scoring that combines capital, work, and knowledge with a diversity penalty.
- Network health metrics : systemic indicator, circle temperature, entropy, Gini, participation across layers.
- A members application with onboarding, identity, persona management, and governance flows.
- A queryable knowledge graph with hundreds of vetted concepts, papers, and models.
- An EU operating entity.
What is not live yet
- Personalized graph-based reputation (MeritRank-style).
- Graph-native AML detection that recognises laundering as a shape, not a per-transaction rule.
- The full multilayer visualization stack : the ring view is shipped, the stacked-layer and terrain views are partial.
- Quadratic and conviction voting with sybil-resistant delegation analytics.
- Token-economy calibration that treats emission and burn as a control system.
- Options and forwards. MiFID II Phase 3 work, scheduled 2027–2028.
Compliance posture
- Legal entity: FXYZ Sp. z o.o., Poland.
- Regulatory and compliance readiness remains an active workstream.
- MiFID II Phase 3 (options and forwards): scheduled 2027–2028. Not in flight.
- We never write "MiCA-approved" or "CASP approved."
Multiplex structure (formal)
We follow Kivelä's parallel-axis formalism. Containment first, then orthogonal axes.
Containment (ontic): realm ⊃ domain ⊃ territory.
- Realm. Physical / Electronic / Digital. The asset universe a relationship lives in.
- Domain. The category of the relationship. Today's working configuration carries seven: Value, Work, Knowledge, Governance, Settlement, Social, Identity. Cardinality is open and the visible count on any surface is a UI decision per surface.
- Territory. A bounded fiat sub-region of a domain. Structural only. Never country names.
Orthogonal axes within a territory (analytical):
- Layer. One elementary value within an aspect. Kivelä elementary-layer.
- Dimension. Mathematical only: coordinate axis, vector space, Buckingham π. Never colloquial.
- Perspective. Observer-indexed section. Sheaf-section plus Dennett-stance.
Cardinality is a design choice. The current layer count is a working configuration, not a theorem, and it's the first DAO-vote candidate after emission.
The 21-grid claim from older drafts is retired in canon. Layers can be many. They may even be realm-dependent.
References (load-bearing)
- Adams, A., Lader, M.-C., Liao, G., Puth, D., & Wan, X. (2023). On-Chain Foreign Exchange and Cross-Border Payments. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4328948
- Auer, R., & Boehme, R. (2020). The Technology of Retail Central Bank Digital Currency. BIS Quarterly Review. https://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt2003j.htm
- Castrén, O., Kavonius, I. K., & Rancan, M. (2022). Digital Currencies in Financial Networks. Journal of Financial Stability 60, 101000.
- Huang, W., Ranaldo, A., Schrimpf, A., & Somogyi, F. (2023). Constrained Liquidity Provision in Currency Markets. BIS Working Paper. https://www.bis.org/publ/work1073.htm
- Kivelä, M., Arenas, A., Barthelemy, M., Gleeson, J. P., Moreno, Y., & Porter, M. A. (2014). Multilayer networks. Journal of Complex Networks 2(3), 203–271.
- Mitchell, J. C. (1969). Social Networks in Urban Situations. Manchester University Press.
- Padgett, J. F., & Ansell, C. K. (1993). Robust Action and the Rise of the Medici, 1400–1434. American Journal of Sociology 98(6), 1259–1319.
- Packer, C., Fang, V., Patil, S. G., Lin, K., Wooders, S., & Gonzalez, J. E. (2023). MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systems. arXiv 2310.08560.
- Rio-Chanona, R. M. del, Korniyenko, Y., Patnam, M., & Porter, M. A. (2020). The Multiplex Nature of Global Financial Contagions. Applied Network Science 5(1).
- Robertson, B. (2022). Integrating DAOs and Holacracy for Organizational Governance. HolacracyOne.
- Visconti, R. M. (2022). From Physical Reality to the Metaverse: A Multilayer Network Valuation. Journal of Metaverse 2(1).
- Wang, Y., Chen, Y., Wu, H., Zhou, L., Deng, S., & Wattenhofer, R. (2021). Cyclic Arbitrage in Decentralized Exchanges.
The full 48-entry bibliography from v1 is preserved within the live catalogue at /resources/bibliography, which has since grown well beyond it.