Dispute Lifecycle
Every dispute in Slice follows a deterministic, transparent lifecycle designed to ensure fairness, incentive alignment, and automatic execution.
While specific parameters may vary depending on the tier or dispute type, the overall structure of the process remains consistent across the protocol.
1. Dispute Creation
A dispute begins when a party (the Claimer) initiates a case against another party (the Defender).
At creation time:
the dispute parameters are defined,
the applicable tier is selected,
and the dispute becomes available for participation.
From this point forward, the dispute is governed entirely by protocol rules.
2. Stake Deposit
Both the Claimer and the Defender are required to deposit the stake defined by the selected tier.
This stake:
signals commitment to the process,
prevents frivolous or spam disputes,
and ensures that both parties have economic exposure to the outcome.
If the required stakes are not deposited within the allowed time window, the dispute does not proceed.
3. Evidence Submission
Once the dispute is funded, both parties may submit evidence supporting their position.
Evidence is:
submitted off-chain,
cryptographically referenced on-chain,
and made available to all assigned jurors.
The protocol does not interpret evidence. It only guarantees that evidence is immutable and equally accessible.
4. Juror Assignment
A set of jurors is assigned to the dispute according to the rules defined by the selected tier.
Juror assignment:
is randomized,
is independent from the disputing parties,
and ensures the dispute reaches the required number of jurors.
Jurors must deposit their own stake in order to participate.
5. Commit Phase
During the commit phase, each juror submits a cryptographic commitment to their vote.
This phase:
prevents vote copying or coordination,
ensures jurors make independent decisions,
and protects the integrity of the voting process.
Votes are not visible during this phase.
6. Reveal Phase
In the reveal phase, jurors reveal their previously committed votes.
The protocol verifies that each revealed vote matches its original commitment.
Once all required votes are revealed — or the reveal period expires — the dispute moves to resolution.
7. Resolution and Execution
After the voting phase concludes, the protocol determines the outcome based on juror votes.
The result is:
final for the current dispute,
enforced automatically by smart contracts,
and executed without human intervention.
This includes:
redistribution of stakes between the parties,
rewards and penalties for jurors,
and the final settlement of the dispute.
Finality
In the current implementation, dispute outcomes are final once executed.
Future versions of the protocol may introduce appeal mechanisms or additional resolution layers, depending on the dispute type and tier.
Last updated