2026-01-02 21:22:46

Many people are curious about how on-chain oracles work. Essentially, they transfer off-chain data onto the blockchain, but the key question is—are these data trustworthy?

APRO offers a different solution. It not only acts as a data relay but also uses AI cross-verification combined with a dual-layer network architecture to perform multi-dimensional validation of each input, such as price information, match results, and other data for smart contracts.

You can think of this process as an on-chain "detective work"—collecting information from multiple independent sources, cross-checking with AI logic, and intercepting risks before the data enters the contract. This significantly reduces the space for fraud and tampering.

Ultimately, the authenticity of smart contract execution depends on the quality of the data fed into it. APRO’s value proposition lies here: ensuring data integrity and authenticity from the source, providing real assurance for contract operation.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

20 Likes

Reward
20
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

HashRateHermit

· 01-04 18:39

To be honest, the oracle part has always been the area with the greatest centralized risk. The APRO double-layer verification approach isn't bad. --- AI cross-validation sounds good, but it still depends on how it is implemented in practice; otherwise, it's just talk. --- The key question is who will audit these AI models. It feels like we're just switching to a different trust object. --- Finally, there's a project trying to solve this problem from the source. Other oracles should be on high alert. --- The details of the double-layer network architecture weren't clearly explained. How can we ensure that neither layer is vulnerable to attack? --- Wait, no, the data source itself is centralized. No matter how you verify it, it can't be saved. --- Multi-dimensional verification can indeed reduce the space for cheating, which is much better than relying on a single data source. --- It still seems like the trustworthiness of off-chain data hasn't been truly addressed; it's just added a filter. --- If AI is smart enough, it can indeed block most fraud. But AI itself also needs to be verified. --- Wow, this is exactly what Web3 has been pursuing all along: ensuring data integrity from the source without manipulation.

View OriginalReply0

PretendingSerious

· 01-02 21:51

Hmm, is oracle data really trustworthy? That's a good question to ask. Double verification sounds good, but it really depends on how it's actually implemented. AI cross-checking is a highlight, but it's still quite difficult for hackers to cause trouble. This approach is much more reliable than simply copying data; at least someone is thinking. In the end, data quality determines everything; controlling the source is the key.

View OriginalReply0

MEVSandwichMaker

· 01-02 21:44

Data credibility has always been the Achilles' heel of this circle. Relying on just one or two nodes is just laughable. AI cross-validation sounds good, but can it truly withstand manipulation by large traders? That's the key point. At the oracle layer, multi-source redundancy is still necessary. APRO's dual-layer architecture approach is correct; now it depends on how well the implementation performs.

View OriginalReply0

WinterWarmthCat

· 01-02 21:34

It's another Oracle problem, which is really a common topic. Distrust in the data source, no matter how much validation is done, is pointless... APRO's AI cross-validation sounds good, but the key is who will verify the verifiers. I think it still depends on the specific implementation; all the theories sound great.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketBard

· 01-02 21:33

Data verification truly needs to be solid; otherwise, no matter how powerful the smart contract is, it's useless. --- AI cross-validation sounds good, but I'm worried it will just become empty talk. --- The key still depends on actual operational results; don't let marketing outweigh reality again. --- The trust crisis of oracles should have been solved long ago; finally, someone is taking it seriously. --- I like this double-layer network architecture; it's much more reliable than simply copying data. --- Basically, it's like installing a quality inspector on the chain, which seems feasible. --- Reducing fraud space ≠ zero risk; don't overhype it.

View OriginalReply0

OnchainFortuneTeller

· 01-02 21:30

Data quality is indeed the core, but to be honest, can the cross-validation process really completely solve trust issues? It still feels like there are vulnerabilities. However, the idea of a double-layer network architecture is quite interesting, and more reliable than those claiming to be "decentralized" but actually having single points of failure. AI verification sounds impressive, but I'm worried it might end up just another black box. Price information is the most vulnerable to attacks. Has the APRO system been tested in actual DEX flash loan scenarios? Instead of boasting about detective work, it's better to let the data speak. How much level of attack can this round withstand?

View OriginalReply0