Paper detail

Game of Coding: Sybil Resistant Decentralized Machine Learning with Minimal Trust Assumption

Coding theory plays a crucial role in ensuring data integrity and reliability across various domains, from communication to computation and storage systems. However, its reliance on trust assumptions for data recovery, which requires the number of honest nodes to exceed adversarial nodes by a certain margin, poses significant challenges, particularly in emerging decentralized systems where trust is a scarce resource. To address this, the game of coding framework was introduced, offering insights into strategies for data recovery within incentive-oriented environments. In such environments, participant nodes are rewarded as long as the system remains functional (live). This incentivizes adversaries to maximize their rewards (utility) by ensuring that the decoder, as the data collector (DC), successfully recovers the data, preferably with a high estimation error. This rational behavior is leveraged in a game-theoretic framework, where the equilibrium leads to a robust and resilient system, referred to as the game of coding. The focus of the earliest version of the game of coding was limited to scenarios involving only two nodes. In this paper, we generalize the game of coding framework to scenarios with $N \ge 2$ nodes, exploring critical aspects of system behavior. Specifically, we (i) demonstrate that the adversary's utility at equilibrium is non-increasing with additional adversarial nodes, ensuring no gain for the adversary and no pain for the DC, thus establishing the game of coding framework's Sybil resistance; (ii) show that increasing the number of honest nodes does not always enhance the DC's utility, providing examples and proposing an algorithm to identify and mitigate this counterintuitive effect; and (iii) outline the optimal strategies for both the DC and the adversary, demonstrating that the system achieves enhanced liveness at equilibrium.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.