Priority Queue-Based Delegation Strategy

JIP - Drafts
1

1. Title and Category

Title: Priority Queue-Based Staking to Reduce Stake Churn and Incentivize Consistency in maintaining eligibility
Category: Process

2. Abstract

This proposal introduces a hybrid approach to stake distribution that balances several key factors: (1) the consistency of validators in maintaining eligibility within the top ranks, (2) strategic stake distribution favoring top-ranked validators, and (3) expanding the delegation pool to include as many independent validators as possible. This approach seeks to support both stability and decentralization by rewarding consistent performance while promoting a broader, more resilient validator network.

3. Motivation

While current scoring captures general consistency across validators, the economic importance of the top 200 ranks warrants more precise grading. Consistently high-performing validators not only meet standard benchmarks like APY and uptime but also demonstrate added commitment by maintaining hot spares, engaging in community discussions, and competing with well-resourced organizations. For smaller validators striving to enter and sustain their position within this eligibility set, stake pools are essential for financial viability, making fair and stable delegation crucial to their long-term sustainability.

.

4. Key Terms

  • Eligibility Score (E): A score that evaluates a validator’s current eligibility based on Jito’s ranking criteria.
  • Consistency Score (C): A score that tracks a validator’s eligibility consistency over the last three cycles.
  • Combined Ranking Score (R): A weighted combination of the Eligibility and Consistency scores, used to determine staking priority.
  • Latest Rank (L): The validator’s most recent rank based on scores, used as a secondary criterion to break ties.

5. Specification

The proposal introduces a priority queue for staking allocation based on the following calculations:

  1. Primary Ranking Score (R): Calculated as: R=w1â‹…E+w2â‹…C
    where E is the latest eligibility score, C is the consistency score over the past three cycles, and w1​ and w2 are weighting factors to balance the importance of eligibility and consistency.
  2. Secondary Criterion (Latest Rank L): In case of ties in R, the most recent rank L is used as a tiebreaker, with higher-ranked (lower-numbered) validators receiving priority.
  3. Queue Process:
  • Validators are added to the staking priority queue based on R, with ties resolved by L.
  • This queue structure will prioritize consistently eligible validators, thereby enhancing stability and reducing stake churn.

6. Benefits/Risks

Benefits:

  • Reduces stake churn by prioritizing consistent performers.
  • Incentivizes validators to maintain eligibility over time, improving network stability.
  • Ensures fair distribution by rewarding recent high performance in tie cases.

Risks:

  • May marginally delay staking for validators with fluctuating performance, potentially discouraging some newer entrants.
  • Implementation complexity, requiring adjustments to the existing staking allocation algorithm.

7. Outcomes

The proposed priority queue-based system is expected to:

  • Reduce stake churn in Jito’s delegation strategy by prioritizing validators that consistently meet eligibility criteria.
  • Encourage validators to maintain high, consistent performance over time, fostering a more reliable validator set.
  • Improve network stability by favoring sustained eligibility, thus reducing the likelihood of frequent stake movements.
  • Decrease random stake reallocations over the long term, as consistently eligible validators are less likely to fall out of the top 200 unexpectedly. This approach minimizes the chances of random entrants briefly making the top 200 only to fall out shortly after, creating a more stable and predictable staking environment.
    Support gradual ranking improvements for consistent validators, even if they experience minor rank fluctuations within the top 200. This system will allow validators with tenured eligibility to gradually move up the priority queue, rewarding long-term consistency and ensuring that minor dips do not significantly impact their stake eligibility.

8. Cost Summary

Minimal additional computational cost, as the ranking adjustments are based on readily available score data. Development time for modifying the staking allocation algorithm is estimated at approximately X developer hours (details to be determined).

9. Performance Milestones

Not applicable, as this proposal falls under process rather than treasury allocation.

3 Likes