RobotFi is an emerging field where participants can earn on-chain rewards by funding or developing robot-related activities.
Author: Fishmarketacad (evm/acc)
Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow
I was recently watching videos of robots walking and couldn't help but think during my morning walk: what if robots… but on-chain?
The core of decentralized finance (DeFi) is the automation of financial processes through code, while robots automate physical tasks. Combining the two is a natural extension of automation development. If we believe in the power of programmable money, smart contracts, and artificial intelligence, then extending this programmability to robots—as physical programmable AI agents—seems like a logical next step.
Currently, one of the industry leaders in the robotics field is Unitree.
In reality, robots like Unitree are still years away from mainstream applications, and putting robots on-chain sounds like a more distant dream. But since we are envisioning the future…
How can such a vision be realized today?
Current robots do not directly interact with the blockchain at the hardware level. They do not have built-in blockchain nodes or cryptographic processors (though this is another interesting idea to explore later).
Therefore, to put existing robots on-chain, we need a bridging or intermediary layer—typically an off-chain service or server—to connect the robots to the blockchain. Each robot also needs to be assigned a wallet address.
Unitree robots connect to off-chain services through their existing communication capabilities (such as Wi-Fi, Ethernet, and possibly cellular networks) using standard network protocols (like HTTP, WebSockets, etc.). The off-chain service then interacts with the blockchain using standard blockchain libraries and APIs (like Web3.js, Ethers.js).
Smart contracts on the blockchain can trigger actions of Unitree robots through the off-chain service. For example, when the off-chain service detects that a wallet address associated with a robot has received a payment, it sends instructions to the robot to perform certain tasks.
I also assume that future robots will be programmable like smart contracts, capable of executing various "action scripts/robot strategies" that can be created by independent developers, thus treating robots as physical smart contracts or AI agents.
The initial creation of these scripts may be as free as the "Wild West," allowing developers to write scripts for almost any task for the robots, except for certain prohibited behaviors. For instance, there might be an independent security or management system that monitors in real-time and prevents robots from performing any dangerous operations. Of course, this is just our imagination.
This would enable robotics companies to focus on the robots themselves without worrying too much about the services the robots can perform. Robot services would be "outsourced" to developers. The robot services provided on-chain (via off-chain services) constitute RobotFi.
In other words, RobotFi is an emerging field where participants can earn on-chain rewards by funding or developing robot-related activities.
What are the potential use cases of RobotFi?
Over-collateralized Home Service Rentals
One of the most popular use cases for humanoid robots is assisting with home services.
However, running robot services may come with many risks in the early stages.
Robots may malfunction, make mistakes, get damaged, or perform below expectations. Traditional rental or service models rely on trust in the platform or service provider.
This is precisely where RobotFi could have significant potential.
Instead of relying on centralized insurance companies or corporate guarantees, we can bring robots on-chain through the development of off-chain services and further develop related services for the robots (like home services). To secure this service, developers can attract on-chain liquidity providers (LPs) to provide collateral as insurance or economic security, in exchange for real earnings generated by the service.
Mechanism Analysis:
- Robot Strategy Insurance Pools:
LPs deposit collateral into insurance pools, acting as insurance providers for robot strategies and earning returns from the profits generated by the strategies.
- Robot Strategy Insurance Buyers:
Creators of robot strategies can purchase strategy insurance from these insurance pools. The premium depends on various factors, such as the type and value of the robot, the risk level of the task, and the required insurance coverage.
- Smart Contract Controlled Payouts:
Insurance is managed by smart contracts that define the conditions for triggering payouts. For example, if a robot strategy fails (which could be diagnosed by the robot reporting to the off-chain service and uploading to the on-chain), the smart contract would trigger the payout mechanism to compensate users of that strategy from the LP's collateral (similar to a "haircut mechanism"). If everything goes as planned, the robot diagnosis will report the task completion to the off-chain service and pay profits to the LP.
In the above example, I separated the robot and the robot strategy, but renting the robot along with the robot strategy as a whole is also feasible. In this case, insurance coverage could extend to the robot itself. For instance, if the robot is damaged during the rental period, the payout would go to the robot's owner.
Additionally, renters may need to undergo some KYC verification (to prevent them from "running away with the robot"), and the creditworthiness of the renter may also affect the premium cost. For example, if the renter has a good reputation on-chain and/or a high income (possibly verified through zero-knowledge proofs), the premium cost that developers need to pay would be lower, and vice versa.
Summary: Analogies to the Blockchain Ecosystem:
Robots (Infrastructure/Chain): Provide core infrastructure—easily programmable and high-performance physical robots.
Robot Services (On-chain Applications): Expert-written specialized task scripts, akin to applications built on the robot infrastructure.
Robot Insurance (LP Collateral): LP collateral provides security and economic support for robot services, offering trust and assurance mechanisms for risk and failure handling in the RobotFi ecosystem, just as collateral in decentralized finance provides security and guarantees for on-chain transactions and network operations.
From a technical perspective, robot services do not necessarily need to be insured, but on-chain payments for robot services do have certain advantages. However, since robots exist in the physical world, the inclusion of insurance makes it easier to gain consumer trust, while the absence of insurance may make it difficult to get users to pay.
Economic Incentives and Promotion of Good Robot Behavior
This insurance/collateral system promotes good robot behavior and responsible strategies through strong economic incentives, benefiting all participants:
Incentives for Liquidity Providers (LPs):
- Premium Earnings:
LPs earn returns from the insurance premiums paid by robot owners. Premium earnings need to be attractive enough to incentivize LPs to lock capital in the insurance pools.
- Risk-Adjusted Returns:
Different insurance pools may be designed for different risk levels (such as robot types, task categories). High-risk insurance pools can offer higher returns to compensate for greater payout risks. This mechanism allows LPs to choose based on their risk/return preferences.
Incentives for Robot Owners/Strategy Creators:
- Reduced Financial Risk:
Insurance provides protection for robot owners or strategy creators against significant financial losses due to robot malfunctions, damage, or liability issues. This reduces the risk of robot ownership, making it more attractive and encouraging broader adoption.
- Competitive Advantage:
Robot owners providing insurance services can stand out in the market, gain the trust of end-users, and potentially charge higher rental fees or service charges.
Incentives for Robot Manufacturers/Developers:
- Demand for Reliable Robots:
This insurance system indirectly incentivizes robot manufacturers to produce more reliable and robust robots. Robots with lower failure rates and good safety records may attract lower insurance premiums, making them more favored by owners and users.
- Data-Driven Improvements:
Insurance claims data (such as types of robot failures, common causes of damage) provides valuable feedback to robot manufacturers, helping to continuously improve robot designs and enhance reliability.
Incentives for Users/Renters:
- Peace of Mind and Trust:
Knowing that the robot is insured can provide users with peace of mind and increase their trust in RobotFi services. When renting a robot, users know that if something goes wrong, they can receive some financial compensation.
- Access to More Advanced Robots:
Insurance enables robot owners to be more willing to rent out more advanced and valuable robots, thereby expanding the range of services available to users.
- Fair Compensation Mechanism:
If a robot malfunctions or a task fails, users are entitled to fair compensation through insurance payouts. This not only improves the user experience but also enhances confidence in the robots.
Challenges Faced
Despite the appealing concept of RobotFi, it also presents many complexities, and we are far from being ready. The main issues include centralization concerns, verifiability of robot data, and assessment of insurance payouts.
- Dependence on Off-Chain Services:
As mentioned earlier, existing technology almost inevitably relies on off-chain services. These services become a critical point of centralized control and potential failure. Entities controlling off-chain services will have a significant impact on the RobotFi system.
- Reliable and Verifiable Claims Data:
Insurance payouts rely on verifiable evidence, such as records of robot failures, damage, or task failures. However, reliably and trustlessly transmitting this data from the physical world to the on-chain system is an extremely complex issue.
- Fair Claims Assessment:
Who decides whether a claim is valid and what the payout amount should be? In centralized insurance companies, there are dedicated claims adjusters responsible for this task. In a decentralized RobotFi system, how do we achieve this?
Final Thoughts
This is not a serious article about RobotFi, but rather a potential vision. While the concept of RobotFi is quite appealing, its feasibility depends on overcoming many significant technical, economic, and centralization challenges.
It remains unclear whether this concept can provide sufficient advantages compared to centralizing the entire robot ecosystem under the control of a few core companies, with these companies pre-constructing fixed functions for the robots themselves.
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
