Skip to main content

Network3

Network3 — 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).

Network3 — an AI/Compute | Infra project on the Ethereum network, token (symbol: —).

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: a network/platform that offers running nodes/devices and access to infrastructure (including GPUs) as a service.
  • Who it’s for: node/device operators, GPU providers and users who need access to compute.
  • Why onchain/token: onchain is used as a layer for accounting for the token and some network metrics/attributes; no proof was found per Tier‑1 that the product critically depends on the blockchain (other than the token).

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: runs a node/device or registers in the product (per Tier‑1 as a claimed scenario).
  2. The system does: tracks participation and accruals/statuses in the product; onchain records operations with the token.
  3. The user gets: accruals/rewards and access to product features (details not established).
  4. Where the blockchain is: the token on the Ethereum network and its onchain operations (transfers/ownership).
  5. Token role (if any): incentives/delegation are claimed per Tier‑1, but the protocol necessity of the token is not established.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Network3
Also known as (aliases) Network 3, N3
Logo (logo) ../assets/871_network3_logo.png
Token symbol (ticker) —
Category AI/Compute | Infra
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 0x9b79ea20a8258649401f8c58973281081d905b9f
Token model (token_type) —
Max supply —
Issuance —
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) Per Tier‑1, the homepage claims staking/delegation for node runners and token holders; supply/issuance parameters are not recorded.
Governance —
Admins/keys —
Audit —
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) Seed round funding: $5.5M (claimed on the official website).
AI component (ai_component) GPU/edge infrastructure for AI workloads
Use‑case (use_case) GPU rental + running nodes/devices
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary ai_score 1 / onchain_score 1 / token_score 0 / evidence_score 2
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

In the Tier‑1 source (the official website), Network3 is positioned as a network/platform where participants can run nodes/devices and earn tokens, and also as a market for access to infrastructure (including enterprise GPUs) “from blockchain to AI”.

The verifiable minimum for now: there is an official website, a litepaper/whitepaper, a public token address on the Ethereum network and public social links. A detailed tech description of where exactly AI is used in the product (not “in marketing”) is not recorded in this card per Tier‑1 sources.

Features/modules

  • Node / device running: running a node/device, accounting for participation and rewards (claimed on the website).
  • GPU marketplace (intent): a section about GPU providers and renters (claimed on the website).

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a user runs a node/device → receives accruals/rewards (per Tier‑1).
  • Scenario 2: a provider lists a GPU → renters get access to the GPU (per Tier‑1 as a claimed scenario).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: a wallet compatible with Ethereum (for the token), and an account/access to the product (via the Website/Docs links).
  • Network/chain: Ethereum.
  • Fees: Ethereum network fees for operations with the token.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: the token on the Ethereum network; offchain product/dashboards/services (details are not established per Tier‑1 sources).
  • Participant roles: users who run nodes/devices; GPU providers; GPU renters (per Tier‑1 as claimed roles).
  • Where logic runs: onchain — token accounting; the rest — not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Dependencies: —.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: Tier‑1 claims accruals for running nodes/devices and delegation/staking mechanics for node runners and token holders.
  • Protocol necessity drivers: the necessity of the token as part of incentives is claimed, but detailed protocol mechanics are not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Who pays fees: users for onchain operations with the token (Ethereum).
  • Where fees go: to the Ethereum network (fee validators).
  • Issuance/burn: — (not established per Tier‑1 sources).

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: — (not established per Tier‑1 sources).

Security and incidents

  • Audits: —.
  • Bug bounty: —.
  • Incidents: —.

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: — (not established per Tier‑1 sources).
  • Roadmap: —.

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: —.
  • Partners: —.
  • Where it’s actually used: —.

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? Per Tier‑1 (the official website), the project positions itself as infrastructure “from blockchain to AI” and mentions enterprise GPUs; Tier‑1 technical proof of a working AI component (model/inference/metrics) is not established.
  • What is truly onchain? There is a token on the Ethereum network (per the explorer).
  • Why is a token needed? Per Tier‑1, incentives/rewards and staking/delegation mechanics are claimed, but the detailed protocol necessity of the token is not established.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): mixing “AI positioning” with infrastructure claims without technical artifacts; there is insufficient Tier‑1 confirmation of AI mechanics and onchain criticality.

DecAI Fit component summary

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

AI reality

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

  • AI_0 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): The official website positions Network3 as infrastructure “from blockchain to AI” and offers access to enterprise GPUs.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://network3.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): This records AI intent/applicability, but does not prove the existence of its own AI component (model/inference/metrics).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 description of a specific AI feature was found (what exactly “the AI does” in the product).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://network3.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Without a specific description of AI features, we set 0 (conservatively).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): A demo of AI features is not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no verifiable demo/guide, so 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: —.
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —.
  • Evidence: —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI quality metrics are not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 tech description of the AI part/model architecture was found.
  • Evidence: —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Without a tech description of the AI component, we set 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

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

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum
  • Addresses/identifiers: ERC‑20 token contract: 0x9b79ea20a8258649401f8c58973281081d905b9f
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x9b79ea20a8258649401f8c58973281081d905b9f
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is a verifiable onchain token address on a public network.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • OC_2 (decision): 0
  • What useful logic is onchain: Not established (other than the token).
  • Evidence: —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): No Tier‑1 confirmation of useful onchain logic beyond the token was found.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: it is not established that a key property of the product breaks down without the blockchain (per Tier‑1 sources).
  • Evidence: —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no sufficient justification of onchain criticality, so 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): The project has a token on the Ethereum network.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x9b79ea20a8258649401f8c58973281081d905b9f
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): The existence of the token is confirmed by the explorer.
  • 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 of mandatory payment for services with the token was found.
  • Evidence: —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Without confirmation in Tier‑1, we set 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • TK_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): Tier‑1 claims rewards/delegation, but the mechanics of incentives/collateral/penalties as part of the protocol are not established.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://network3.ai/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Claims without detailed mechanics are insufficient for 1.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 confirmation of governance mechanics using the token was found.
  • Evidence: —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is no description of governance use of the token, so 0.
  • 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 established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Without explicit justification, we set 0.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://network3.ai/ Project positioning, roles (node runners / token holders) and intent regarding infrastructure for GPU/AI.
Tier‑1 https://network3.io/Network3_Whitepaper_V1.0.pdf The project’s whitepaper (Tier‑1 technical/product claims).
Tier‑1 https://litepaper.network3.ai/ Litepaper (Tier‑1 introductory documentation).
Tier‑1 https://etherscan.io/token/0x9b79ea20a8258649401f8c58973281081d905b9f Onchain fact: the token on the Ethereum network (contract address).
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source for claim “a working AI component (model/inference/metrics) in the product” was found.
Tier‑2 https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/network3/ Reference token profile/metadata (not proof of AI/onchain usefulness).

No comments to display

Back to top