Posterior
α = 4 + weighted successes; β = 1 + weighted failures. The posterior mean is α ÷ (α + β).
Contextual credibility
Moral Trade estimates how likely a participant is to complete a particular kind of commitment with valid evidence and compliant settlement. It does not rank moral views, causes, popularity, wealth, or perceived virtue.
Prediction target
For participant u and proposed trade t, the model estimates the probability of acceptable completion given the participant's role, trade class, stake, duration, complexity, verification method, and assurance structure.
Acceptable completion means the material obligations were completed under the registered terms or a mutually agreed amendment, required evidence passed review, settlement obligations were met, and no attributable unresolved dispute or material deception remains.
Additionality and the no-trade baseline remain separate deal properties. A reliable participant can still offer a non-additional action, and a genuinely additional offer can come from a new participant with limited history.
Bayesian calculation
Model v1 uses a Beta prior with 4 virtual successes and 1 virtual failure. Verified outcomes update that prior after evidence, recency, independence, context, and capped stake weights are applied.
α = 4 + weighted successes; β = 1 + weighted failures. The posterior mean is α ÷ (α + β).
100 × the posterior's lower 10th percentile. Sparse records therefore remain visibly uncertain.
Exact role and category evidence receives full weight. Same-role evidence receives 70%, same-category evidence 60%, and unrelated history only 25%.
Dimensions
Free-form ratings can provide context, but they do not directly determine the core estimate. Platform or independently reviewed transaction events carry the score.
Was the agreed commitment completed under the agreed deadline or amendment?
Was required evidence authentic, sufficient, and consistent with the registered terms?
Were payments, authorizations, or other settlement obligations completed correctly?
Did the participant cooperate with review and comply with the final resolution?
Did the participant meet objective, agreed response requirements?
Event weighting
Platform-verified, independent, or adjudicated evidence receives full weight; bilateral confirmation receives partial weight; unilateral self-report receives little.
Evidence decays exponentially with a 365-day half-life. The model can later replace this parameter after observing behavioural drift.
Repeated transactions with one counterparty have sharply diminishing evidentiary value, reducing wash-trade and reciprocal-rating incentives.
Stake can increase evidentiary weight only logarithmically and is capped at 2×. Wealth therefore cannot purchase credibility linearly.
Safety separation
Fraud, forged evidence, coercion, threats, identity duplication, and account compromise enter a separate eligibility system. They can require manual review or restrict an account; successful micro-transactions cannot wash them away.
Transaction safeguards
Small pilot, staged performance, independent evidence, and low unsecured exposure.
Moderate limits with standard or enhanced evidence.
Higher limits for familiar trade classes, while preserving challenge windows.
Lower friction for low-risk contexts; irreversible or high-stake trades still require proportionate safeguards.
Validation state
The event ledger, weighting rules, uncertainty calculation, public aggregate boundary, and safety separation are active. Exact deal probabilities are labelled provisional until enough resolved trades exist for out-of-time calibration by role, category, stake, duration, and verification method.
© 2026 Moral Trade