Skip to main content

AIDOC

AIDOC — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).

AIDOC — a project that positions itself as “AI doctor on the blockchain” for analyzing health data; token (symbol: AIDOC).

Disclaimer

Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.

TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)

  • What it is: an application/platform that claims an “AI doctor” and work with medical data using a blockchain component.
  • Who it’s for: for users who want to receive health recommendations/insights (per the project’s claim).
  • Why onchain/token: per the project’s claim, data and its exchange/storage are tied to a blockchain layer, and the token is used within the ecosystem; details of the mechanics are not confirmed by Tier‑1 (see Evidence).

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: collects/uploads health data (per the project’s claim).
  2. The system does: analyzes data and provides “health insight” using an AI component (per the project’s claim).
  3. The user gets: health recommendations/insights.
  4. Where the blockchain is: the project claims the recording/use of data on the blockchain.
  5. Token role: the project claims the use of the token in the ecosystem and the exchange of data for tokens; detailed mechanics are not confirmed by Tier‑1.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name AIDOC
Also known as (aliases) AIDoctor
Logo (logo) ../assets/684_aidoc_logo.png
Token symbol (ticker) AIDOC
Category AI/Other | Consumer
Primary chain (chain) Ethereum
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) —
Project status (status) —
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0x584b44853680ee34a0f337b712a8f66d816df151
Token model (token_type) —
Max supply —
Issuance —
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) The exchange/use of data for tokens is claimed; details are not confirmed by Tier‑1.
Governance —
Admins/keys —
Audit —
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) AI doctor for health insights
Use‑case (use_case) health metrics analysis + recommendations
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary 1 / 1 / 0 / 1
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Per a Tier‑1 source, the project is positioned as “AI Doctor on the Blockchain”: it claims the collection/analysis of medical data, the provision of recommendations and the use of a blockchain component for data/the ecosystem. Confirmation of an implemented product, onchain logic (other than the token) and tokenomics requires re‑checking.

Features/modules

  • The claimed “AI Super Doctor” (digital doctor) and health data analysis.
  • Claimed recording/use of data on the blockchain.
  • Claimed exchange/monetization of data via the token (requires re‑checking of the details).

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a user uploads health data → the system analyzes it → the user receives “insight/advice” (per the project’s claim).
  • Scenario 2: a user manages data → participates in exchanging data for tokens (per the project’s claim; details are not confirmed by Tier‑1).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: not confirmed by Tier‑1 (the links include documentation/a whitepaper, but the requirements are not normalized in this card).
  • Network/chain: Ethereum (per the token contract in the explorer).
  • Fees: standard Ethereum network fees for operations with the token; product-level fees/payments are not confirmed by Tier‑1.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: a client application/platform + AI analysis (per the project’s claim) + a token on Ethereum.
  • Participant roles: users, service operators (not precisely established).
  • Where logic runs: AI analysis — not confirmed by Tier‑1 (more likely offchain); onchain logic other than the token is not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Dependencies: not confirmed by Tier‑1.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: exchange/monetization of data via tokens is claimed; detailed mechanics are not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Protocol necessity drivers: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Who pays fees: for token transactions — the transaction sender (Ethereum gas); other fees are not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Where fees go: to the Ethereum network validators (standard gas logic).
  • Issuance/burn: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Security/incentive mechanisms: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Distribution and token issuance schedule: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Treasury: not confirmed by Tier‑1.

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • How protocol parameters change: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Where decisions are discussed/made: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Keys/multisig: not confirmed by Tier‑1.

Security and incidents

  • Audits: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Bug bounty: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Incidents: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Threat model: not confirmed by Tier‑1.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Key releases/milestones: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Roadmap: No Tier‑1 roadmap found.

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Partners: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Where it’s actually used: not confirmed by Tier‑1.

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? The project claims an “AI Super Doctor” and the provision of health insight based on medical data (per a Tier‑1 source).
  • What is truly onchain? Only the token on Ethereum is confirmed by Tier‑1; onchain logic of the product (other than the token) is not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Why is a token needed? The project claims exchange/monetization of data for tokens, but the exact model of token necessity is not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): there are no Tier‑1 artifacts confirming the actual operation of the AI product and onchain logic; some materials on the website contain irrelevant inserts — double‑check against the whitepaper/repositories.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality medium 1
Onchain necessity low 1
Token necessity low 0
Evidence Tier‑1 present 1
Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

  • AI_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): There are signs of AI reality per Tier‑1 (see AI_1..AI_4), so the AI_0 flag (intent‑only) does not apply.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — see Evidence/links in AI_1..AI_4.
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_0=1 is admissible only when AI_1..AI_4=0; here ai_score without AI_0 = 1.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): Health data analysis and the provision of “health insight”/recommendations are claimed.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://www.aidoc.me/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Tier‑1 description directly points to AI analysis and medical recommendations.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 demos/verifiable examples of the AI component in operation were found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://www.aidoc.me/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): no “what you can touch” was found (app/demo with confirmable AI behavior).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://www.aidoc.me/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): quantitative quality metrics and measurement context are absent.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The tech description/architecture of the AI model and versioning are not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://www.aidoc.me/ ; Tier‑1 — http://aidoc.me/html/AIDOC%20White%20Paper-AIdoctor%20on%20the%20Blockchain.pdf
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): no specific tech description/model versions were found in the available Tier‑1 sources.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum
  • Addresses/identifiers: ERC‑20 token: 0x584b44853680ee34a0f337b712a8f66d816df151
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x584b44853680ee34a0f337b712a8f66d816df151
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is a Tier‑1 onchain artifact (the token contract).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

  • OC_2 (decision): 0
  • What useful logic is onchain: No Tier‑1 artifacts of the product’s onchain logic (other than the token) were found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://aidoc.me/html/AIDOC%20White%20Paper-AIdoctor%20on%20the%20Blockchain.pdf
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the absence of confirmable onchain logic → 0 under the conservative rule.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: no Tier‑1 justification of blockchain criticality was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://aidoc.me/html/AIDOC%20White%20Paper-AIdoctor%20on%20the%20Blockchain.pdf
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): onchain criticality is not proven per the operational test.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The project has a token (contract on Ethereum).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x584b44853680ee34a0f337b712a8f66d816df151
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the existence of the token is confirmed by an onchain artifact.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 confirmation that the token is used to pay for a specific service was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://aidoc.me/html/AIDOC%20White%20Paper-AIdoctor%20on%20the%20Blockchain.pdf
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): insufficient data on the payment role of the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

  • TK_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): Tier‑1 mechanics of incentives/collateral/penalties in the protocol are not confirmed.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://aidoc.me/html/AIDOC%20White%20Paper-AIdoctor%20on%20the%20Blockchain.pdf
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): insufficient data on protocol incentives.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 confirmation of the governance role of the token was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://aidoc.me/html/AIDOC%20White%20Paper-AIdoctor%20on%20the%20Blockchain.pdf
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no description of governance via the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The replaceability of the token is not confirmed by Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — http://aidoc.me/html/AIDOC%20White%20Paper-AIdoctor%20on%20the%20Blockchain.pdf
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no Tier‑1 argumentation “replaceable/irreplaceable”.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 http://www.aidoc.me/ Positioning: “AI Doctor on the Blockchain”; descriptions of AI analysis and work with health data.
Tier‑1 http://aidoc.me/html/AIDOC%20White%20Paper-AIdoctor%20on%20the%20Blockchain.pdf Whitepaper (Tier‑1 source per the project’s claim).
Tier‑1 https://github.com/AIDOCGroup/go-aidoc Public repository (the existence of code; without a conclusion about the product).
Tier‑1 https://etherscan.io/token/0x584b44853680ee34a0f337b712a8f66d816df151 Onchain artifact: ERC‑20 token contract.
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source for claim “there is a demo/product you can touch (AI_2)” was found.
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source for claim “there is onchain logic of the product (OC_2)” was found.

No comments to display

Back to top