Skip to main content

Pawtocol

Pawtocol (UPI) — 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).

Pawtocol positions itself as a “pet community” platform with blockchain components: an NFT marketplace “for pets”, a pet tag, transparent donations/funds and a data marketplace. The UPI token (Universal Pet Income) is described as the utility currency of the ecosystem and a mechanism of rewards/transactions.

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 ecosystem/platform for the pet community with NFTs, a “pet tag” and marketplaces for data/goods/services.
  • Who it’s for: pet owners, shelters/rescue organizations, vendors/services and buyers of pet products/services.
  • Why onchain/token: onchain — accounting/ownership (NFTs, transactions), transparency of transfers; the UPI token is used as a currency and a reward for participation.

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: interacts with the app/platform (NFTs/marketplaces/donations/data/pet tags).
  2. The system does: records part of the operations on the blockchain (per the whitepaper: Ethereum + smart contracts; IPFS/distributed storage).
  3. The user gets: digital assets (NFTs), services/discounts/rewards and the ability to monetize pet data.
  4. Where the blockchain is: the UPI token and ecosystem operations; NFT minting/accounting/transparency of donations (per the description).
  5. Token role (if any): UPI is the currency of transactions within the platform and a mechanism of rewards for participation/data.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Pawtocol
Also known as (aliases) UPI; Universal Pet Income
Logo (logo) ../assets/419_pawtocol_logo.svg
Token symbol (ticker) UPI
Category AI/Other | Infra
Primary chain (chain) Ethereum
Type EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Ethereum)
Launch date (launch_date) —
Project status (status) active (based on the presence of the website/whitepaper/contract)
Token (standard) ERC-20
Token contract 0x70D2b7C19352bB76e4409858FF5746e500f2B67c
Token model (token_type) utility (payments + rewards)
Max supply 1,000,000,000 (per the whitepaper)
Issuance fixed (per the whitepaper)
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) currency of transactions and rewards; used for exchange for goods/services/discounts (per the whitepaper)
Governance company / —
Admins/keys —
Audit yes (there is an audit report in GitHub)
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) positioning only ("AI" analytics)
Use‑case (use_case) pet community + NFTs + data marketplace
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 3/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary 1 / 3 / 2 / 2
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

In its whitepaper, Pawtocol describes a platform and economy around pet data, products/services and digital assets. The idea is to “digitize” pet identification (pet tag), give users ownership of data and the ability to monetize it via a data marketplace, and also create an NFT marketplace and mechanics for transparent donations/support of shelters.

Features/modules

  • NFT marketplace for “pet NFTs” (claimed).
  • Blockchain pet tag (a physical/digital pet identifier).
  • Data marketplace and “crowd verification” of products/services (claimed).
  • The UPI token as the currency/rewards of the ecosystem.

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: the user mints a pet NFT → trades/collects on the marketplace (per the whitepaper/website).
  • Scenario 2: the user participates in the data economy (shares pet data/answers requests) → receives UPI (per the whitepaper).

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: an EVM wallet for the ERC‑20 token and operations on Ethereum; access to the Pawtocol app/services (per the website).
  • Network/chain: Ethereum.
  • Fees: Ethereum gas + fees/payments within the services (if applicable).

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: smart contracts (ERC‑20; other ecosystem contracts are described in the whitepaper), offchain apps/marketplaces and distributed storage (IPFS/DES is mentioned).
  • Participant roles: pet owners, vendors/services, shelters/rescues, data buyers (researchers/marketers, etc.), app developers.
  • Where logic runs: accounting/token/NFTs — onchain (Ethereum); apps/UX and data collection — offchain.
  • Dependencies: Ethereum, IPFS/distributed storage, external IoT devices (as data sources).

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: the currency of transactions in the app/marketplaces, payment for goods/services/discounts; rewards for participation (per the whitepaper).
  • Protocol necessity drivers: the token is the “underlying currency” for the product/service marketplace and the data marketplace (per the whitepaper).
  • Who pays fees: users/participants of the ecosystem who make transactions/purchases.
  • Where fees go: — (not established per Tier‑1 sources).
  • Issuance/burn: fixed supply (per the whitepaper); burn mechanics are not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Security/incentive mechanisms: rewards in the token for participation/data (per the whitepaper).
  • Distribution and token issuance schedule: there is a reserve/allocations section in the whitepaper (without detailing here).
  • Treasury: the whitepaper mentions an operations reserve as the treasury (management details are not established).

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: the project’s company/team (DAO processes are not confirmed by Tier‑1).
  • How protocol parameters change: via updates of products/contracts (the procedure is not established).
  • Where decisions are discussed/made: official channels (Website/Whitepaper/Medium/X/Telegram).
  • Keys/multisig: — (not established per Tier‑1 sources).

Security and incidents

  • Audits: there is an audit report for the UPI Token (see links_*).
  • Bug bounty: — (not established).
  • Incidents: — (not established).
  • Threat model: typical risks of smart contracts and offchain apps/storage; privacy/leak risks of pet data (the whitepaper focuses on privacy and distributed storage).

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: active (based on the presence of the website/whitepaper and the onchain token contract).
  • Key releases/milestones: — (not established per Tier‑1 sources).
  • Roadmap: see links_* (the roadmap section in the whitepaper).

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: Ethereum + IPFS (mentioned in the whitepaper); NFTs/marketplaces and mobile apps (mentioned as target components).
  • Partners: — (not established per Tier‑1 sources).
  • Where it’s actually used: NFT minting/purchases/donations/the UPI token economy (per the product description).

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? the whitepaper mentions “Pawtocol’s AI” and analytical tools (including the thesis about IoT devices that “feed data into Pawtocol’s AI”), but without a description of models/metrics/architecture per Tier‑1 sources.
  • What is truly onchain? the ERC‑20 UPI token (address in the explorer); smart contracts and NFT components of the platform are also claimed.
  • Why is a token needed? UPI is described as the currency and reward mechanism for transactions/participation/data monetization.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): the AI part is not specified (high AI‑washing risk); for the platform’s onchain modules other than the token, there are no addresses/contracts per Tier‑1 sources.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 3/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality low 1
Onchain necessity high 3
Token necessity medium 2
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 whitepaper mentions “Pawtocol’s AI” and the use of data/IoT for analytics.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is a claim of AI, but without technical artifacts/metrics.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): specific AI functions (what exactly is computed/how it is verified) are not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the mentions of AI are general in nature, without a description of actions/inputs/outputs.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): a demo/guide showing the operation of the AI component was not found per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the website describes the products, but does not provide a reproducible demo of the AI part.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: —
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): quality metrics of the AI/analytics are absent.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): a tech description of the AI components is not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the whitepaper contains no AI architecture/models/versions.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

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

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Ethereum
  • Addresses/identifiers: UPI token: 0x70D2b7C19352bB76e4409858FF5746e500f2B67c
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x70d2b7c19352bb76e4409858ff5746e500f2b67c ; https://github.com/pawtocol/Token
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the onchain explorer and the official repo confirm the token contract address.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • OC_2 (decision): 1
  • What useful logic is onchain: an NFT marketplace and ecosystem smart contracts (identification/donations/marketplaces) are claimed.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the whitepaper describes onchain components broader than token issuance.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 1
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: without onchain, the claimed properties of digital ownership (NFTs) and of transparency/traceability of donations and transactions, which the whitepaper designates as key, break down.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the blockchain is claimed as the foundation of the architecture and value (ownership/transparency).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the UPI token exists as an ERC‑20.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x70d2b7c19352bb76e4409858ff5746e500f2b67c
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the onchain explorer confirms the token contract.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): UPI is used for transactions in the product/service marketplace and the data marketplace.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the whitepaper states that the “underlying currency” of the marketplaces is UPI Tokens.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

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

  • TK_2 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): users can receive tokens for participation/providing data and activity in the ecosystem.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the whitepaper describes compensation/rewards in the token for participation and data.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): governance via UPI is not established per Tier‑1 sources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the whitepaper focuses on the economy/products; governance mechanics are not confirmed.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): the token is claimed as the base currency of the ecosystem; replaceability has not been assessed per Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): insufficient data from Tier‑1 on replaceability.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://pawtocol.com/whitepaper/ description of the product, onchain architecture and utility of the UPI token
Tier‑1 https://github.com/pawtocol/Token the official token repository (contract address + link to the audit report)
Tier‑1 https://etherscan.io/address/0x70d2b7c19352bb76e4409858ff5746e500f2b67c#code onchain fact: the UPI contract (code on Etherscan)
Tier‑2 https://github.com/solidified-platform/audits/blob/master/Audit%20Report%20-%20Pawtocol%20UPI%20Token%20%5B26.11.2019%5D.pdf third‑party audit of the token (document)
Tier‑2 https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/pawtocol aggregator (context/for reference)

No comments to display

Back to top