> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.sleuthintel.io/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Sleuth - Flywheel Sim - Verifier Threshold T3 vs T2

> Original Sleuth document.

<div style={{ margin: "-24px -32px", width: "calc(100% + 64px)" }}>
  <iframe title="Sleuth - Flywheel Sim - Verifier Threshold T3 vs T2" srcDoc={"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html lang=\"en\">\n<head>\n<meta charset=\"UTF-8\">\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0\">\n<title>SLEUTH \u00b7 Flywheel Sim \u00b7 Verifier Threshold T3 vs T2</title>\n<link href=\"https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Orbitron:wght@500;700;900&family=Share+Tech+Mono&display=swap\" rel=\"stylesheet\">\n<style>\n:root{\n  --green:#00FF66; --green-dim:#00cc52; --green-glow:rgba(0,255,102,0.3);\n  --green-faint:rgba(0,255,102,0.06); --bg:#060606; --card:#0c0c0c;\n  --border:#1a1a1a; --text:#FFD700; --gold:#FFD700; --gold-glow:rgba(255,215,0,0.25);\n  --red:#ff4444; --red-dim:#cc3333;\n}\n*{margin:0;padding:0;box-sizing:border-box;}\nhtml{scroll-behavior:smooth;}\nbody{background:var(--bg);color:var(--text);font-family:'Share Tech Mono',monospace;line-height:1.65;overflow-x:hidden;}\n.wrap{position:relative;z-index:1;max-width:1060px;margin:0 auto;padding:0 24px 80px;}\n.hero{padding:110px 0 30px;}\n.vtag{color:var(--green-dim);font-size:0.78rem;letter-spacing:3px;margin-bottom:18px;}\nh1{font-family:'Orbitron',sans-serif;font-weight:900;color:var(--green);font-size:clamp(1.9rem,4.6vw,3rem);\n  letter-spacing:2px;text-shadow:0 0 18px var(--green-glow);margin-bottom:16px;}\n.section{padding:56px 0 10px;}\n.eyebrow{color:var(--gold);font-size:0.8rem;letter-spacing:3px;margin-bottom:10px;}\nh2{font-family:'Orbitron',sans-serif;font-weight:700;color:var(--green);font-size:clamp(1.4rem,3.2vw,2.1rem);\n  letter-spacing:1.5px;margin-bottom:16px;text-shadow:0 0 14px var(--green-glow);}\nh3{font-family:'Orbitron',sans-serif;font-weight:700;color:var(--gold);font-size:1.05rem;\n  letter-spacing:1.5px;margin:34px 0 12px;}\np{margin-bottom:14px;}\n.lead{font-size:1.08rem;color:var(--gold);}\nul{margin:0 0 16px 20px;}\nli{margin-bottom:10px;}\nstrong{color:var(--green);}\nem{color:var(--green-dim);font-style:normal;}\n.card{background:var(--card);border:1px solid var(--border);border-left:2px solid var(--green-dim);\n  padding:22px;margin:18px 0;border-radius:2px;}\n.card.gold{border-left-color:var(--gold);}\n.card.red{border-left-color:var(--red-dim);}\n.card h4{font-family:'Orbitron',sans-serif;color:var(--green);font-size:0.92rem;letter-spacing:1.5px;margin-bottom:10px;}\n.card.gold h4{color:var(--gold);}\n.card.red h4{color:var(--red);}\n.grid2{display:grid;grid-template-columns:1fr 1fr;gap:20px;margin:22px 0;}\n.grid2 .card{margin:0;}\n@media(max-width:760px){.grid2{grid-template-columns:1fr;}}\n.statrow{display:flex;gap:18px;flex-wrap:wrap;margin:28px 0;}\n.stat{flex:1;min-width:150px;background:var(--card);border:1px solid var(--border);padding:20px;\n  border-radius:2px;text-align:center;}\n.stat .n{font-family:'Orbitron',sans-serif;font-weight:900;color:var(--green);font-size:1.7rem;\n  text-shadow:0 0 12px var(--green-glow);}\n.stat .l{color:var(--gold);font-size:0.72rem;letter-spacing:1.5px;margin-top:6px;}\ntable{width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;margin:22px 0;font-size:0.85rem;}\nth{color:var(--gold);text-align:left;padding:9px 10px;border-bottom:1px solid var(--green-dim);\n  letter-spacing:0.5px;font-weight:400;}\ntd{padding:9px 10px;border-bottom:1px solid var(--border);}\ntr:hover td{background:var(--green-faint);}\n.tablewrap{overflow-x:auto;}\n.callout{border:1px solid var(--green-dim);background:rgba(0,255,102,0.04);padding:24px 28px;\n  margin:26px 0;border-radius:2px;}\n.callout .ct{font-family:'Orbitron',sans-serif;color:var(--green);letter-spacing:2px;font-size:0.95rem;margin-bottom:10px;}\n.callout.red{border-color:var(--red-dim);background:rgba(255,68,68,0.05);}\n.callout.red .ct{color:var(--red);}\n.up{color:var(--green);}\n.flat{color:var(--gold);opacity:0.75;}\n.broken{color:var(--red);}\n.fixed{color:var(--green);}\n.footer{border-top:1px solid var(--border);margin-top:70px;padding-top:24px;font-size:0.75rem;\n  color:var(--green-dim);letter-spacing:2px;text-align:center;}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrap\">\n\n<div class=\"hero\">\n  <div class=\"vtag\">SLEUTH \u00b7 FLYWHEEL SIM \u00b7 VERIFIER THRESHOLD TEST \u00b7 JULY 2026 \u00b7 PRIVATE &amp; CONFIDENTIAL</div>\n  <h1>DROPPING THE VERIFIER GATE FROM T3 TO T2</h1>\n  <p class=\"lead\">The flywheel sim (more contributors \u2192 more accepted intel \u2192 more wages \u2192 more contributors) found one real bottleneck: verifier licensing lag. New contributors joining faster than they can earn into the $1,500 aSLEUTH bar dilutes the pool average, delays licensing, and caps review capacity regardless of headcount. This tests the direct fix: drop the verifier licence bar from Tier 3 ($1,500) to Tier 2 ($1,000), same bar hunters already clear, and rerun every scenario. Slashing penalties (bad pass $50, wrong-reject $50, licence suspension on a pattern) are left untouched, they carry the same weight either way.</p>\n</div>\n\n<section class=\"section\">\n  <div class=\"eyebrow\">// 01</div>\n  <h2>The Question</h2>\n  <p>If hunters can police the tree at $1,000 aSLEUTH, why does verifying, a comparable trust job with the same slashing backstop, need $1,500. This tests whether that extra $500 buys anything, or just slows the swarm's own review capacity down while contributors wait to earn into a seat.</p>\n  <p>Everything else in the sim is unchanged: same 9 scenario cells (elasticity \u00d7 adoption speed), same 25 Monte Carlo runs each, same wage-driven growth loop, same $150K epoch ceiling, same seed wallet and Reserve funding sequence. The only variable that moves is the verifier licence threshold. Marketplace listing (Tier 3, API builders) stays at $1,500, unchanged, this test is scoped to verifying only.</p>\n</section>\n\n<section class=\"section\">\n  <div class=\"eyebrow\">// 02</div>\n  <h2>Headline</h2>\n  <div class=\"statrow\">\n    <div class=\"stat\"><div class=\"n fixed\">9 / 9</div><div class=\"l\">CELLS REACH FULL WAGE EQUILIBRIUM UNDER T2</div></div>\n    <div class=\"stat\"><div class=\"n broken\">1 / 9</div><div class=\"l\">CELLS SELF-LIMITED UNDER T3</div></div>\n    <div class=\"stat\"><div class=\"n up\">5x</div><div class=\"l\">BUILDER COUNT AT MONTH 60, WORST CASE</div></div>\n    <div class=\"stat\"><div class=\"n up\">2x</div><div class=\"l\">CONTRIBUTOR COUNT AT MONTH 60, WORST CASE</div></div>\n  </div>\n  <p>Under the original $1,500 bar, one scenario broke: weak wage-responsiveness paired with fast platform adoption. New contributors flooded in faster than the pool could earn into verifier eligibility, average wage collapsed from $25 to $14 per contributor, and the builder pipeline nearly stalled at 2 API builders by month 60. Every other cell held up fine on its own.</p>\n  <p>Under the $1,000 bar, that scenario no longer breaks. It's the biggest mover in the whole test: contributors more than double (368 \u2192 738), builders go from 2 to 69, and average wage holds at the same $70 equilibrium every healthy scenario converges to. The other eight cells were already fine and stay fine, most get there faster and end up carrying more people at the same wage.</p>\n</section>\n\n<section class=\"section\">\n  <div class=\"eyebrow\">// 03</div>\n  <h2>All 9 Cells, Side by Side</h2>\n  <p>Wage $ is the average paid per active contributor at month 60. C is contributor count. Builders is API listers on the Marketplace, month 60.</p>\n  <div class=\"tablewrap\">\n  <table>\n    <tr><th>elasticity</th><th>adoption</th><th>wage@60 \u00b7 T3</th><th>wage@60 \u00b7 T2</th><th>C@60 \u00b7 T3</th><th>C@60 \u00b7 T2</th><th>builders@60 \u00b7 T3</th><th>builders@60 \u00b7 T2</th></tr>\n    <tr><td>sticky</td><td>slow</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td>183</td><td>183</td><td>17</td><td>17</td></tr>\n    <tr><td>sticky</td><td>base</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td>368</td><td>369</td><td>33</td><td>35</td></tr>\n    <tr><td>sticky</td><td>fast</td><td class=\"broken\">$14</td><td class=\"fixed\">$70</td><td>368</td><td>738</td><td>2</td><td>69</td></tr>\n    <tr><td>responsive</td><td>slow</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td>163</td><td>163</td><td>15</td><td>15</td></tr>\n    <tr><td>responsive</td><td>base</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td>330</td><td>331</td><td>30</td><td>31</td></tr>\n    <tr><td>responsive</td><td>fast</td><td class=\"up\">$70</td><td class=\"up\">$70</td><td>635</td><td>664</td><td>42</td><td>62</td></tr>\n    <tr><td>viral</td><td>slow</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td>125</td><td>125</td><td>11</td><td>11</td></tr>\n    <tr><td>viral</td><td>base</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td class=\"flat\">$70</td><td>255</td><td>255</td><td>23</td><td>23</td></tr>\n    <tr><td>viral</td><td>fast</td><td class=\"up\">$70</td><td class=\"up\">$70</td><td>492</td><td>515</td><td>37</td><td>47</td></tr>\n  </table>\n  </div>\n  <p>Note the two \"fast\" cells that were already recovering under T3 (responsive-fast, viral-fast, both reached $70 by month 60 but took until month 36-48 to get there): under T2 they reach the same equilibrium wage faster and carry meaningfully more builders by month 60. Dropping the bar doesn't just rescue the one broken cell, it shortens the runway everywhere growth is fast.</p>\n</section>\n\n<section class=\"section\">\n  <div class=\"eyebrow\">// 04</div>\n  <h2>The One Cell That Broke, Before and After</h2>\n  <p>Sticky elasticity means contributors respond weakly to the wage signal in either direction, they don't rush in when wages are great and don't pull back hard when wages drop. Paired with fast adoption (large addressable market, contributors flood in on headroom alone), that's the one combination where inflow outpaces licensing badly enough to spiral.</p>\n  <div class=\"grid2\">\n    <div class=\"card red\">\n      <h4>T3 \u00b7 $1,500 BAR</h4>\n      <p>Month 12: wage $25, 207 contributors.<br>\n      Month 36: wage $14, 379 contributors, verifiers stuck near 5.<br>\n      Month 60: wage $14, 368 contributors, only 2 builders ever list an API. The pool never earns its way into enough licensed verifiers to clear the submission queue. Headcount grows, review capacity doesn't, wage per person gets crushed.</p>\n    </div>\n    <div class=\"card\">\n      <h4>T2 \u00b7 $1,000 BAR</h4>\n      <p>Month 12: wage $40, 219 contributors.<br>\n      Month 36: wage $70, 705 contributors, verifiers at scale.<br>\n      Month 60: wage $70, 738 contributors, 69 builders. Same flood of new contributors, but the lower bar means enough of them earn in fast enough to keep review capacity ahead of submissions. The exact same growth pressure that broke T3 is what T2 turns into its best-performing cell.</p>\n    </div>\n  </div>\n</section>\n\n<section class=\"section\">\n  <div class=\"eyebrow\">// 05</div>\n  <h2>What This Doesn't Test</h2>\n  <ul>\n    <li><strong>Verdict quality.</strong> The sim tracks throughput and licensing timing, not whether a $1,000-balance verifier grades as accurately as a $1,500-balance one. Slashing ($50 bad pass, $50 wrong reject, suspension on a pattern) is the mechanism that's supposed to carry that risk regardless of entry bar, but the sim doesn't model verifier skill separately from tenure.</li>\n    <li><strong>The other eligibility conditions.</strong> The WP's verifier licence isn't just the $1,500 balance, it's also a minimum of 10 accepted contributions in the niche and an acceptance rate above the floor. This test only moved the balance threshold. Worth confirming the other two gates don't need adjusting alongside it.</li>\n    <li><strong>Niche-level pool minimums.</strong> WP requires 9 licensed verifiers in a niche before swarm grading activates there, with senior oversight below 15. This sim runs as one aggregate pool, not per niche, so it can't confirm small niches clear that floor faster under T2, only that the aggregate pool does.</li>\n  </ul>\n</section>\n\n<div class=\"callout\">\n  <div class=\"ct\">RECOMMENDATION</div>\n  <p style=\"margin:0\">Move the verifier licence to Tier 2 ($1,000 aSLEUTH), matching the hunting licence. It rescues the one scenario that breaks under the current bar and improves every fast-growth scenario without cost to the slower ones. Before it goes into the whitepaper: confirm the 10-accepted-contributions and acceptance-rate-floor conditions still hold as the real backstop on verifier quality, since the balance bar alone was never the only gate.</p>\n</div>\n\n<footer class=\"footer\">\n  SLEUTH \u00b7 INTERNAL \u00b7 FLYWHEEL SIM \u00b7 VERIFIER THRESHOLD T3 VS T2 \u00b7 v1\n</footer>\n\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n" } style={{ width: "100%", minHeight: "100vh", border: "none", display: "block", background: "#060606" }} />
</div>
