Discussion Details
2025 Input Output Engineering Core Development Proposal
inputoutput
Description
Thank you for your review and consideration. Please see the full proposal in the attached for additional information.
- Automatic Formal Verification (Plutus High Assurance): Develop automated formal verification tool for Plinth/Cardano DApps. ($1,859,000)
- Property Based Testing Tool (Plutus High Assurance): Develop Plinth PBT Tool to automatically generate diverse inputs/actions. ($2,366,000)
- Static Analyzer (Plutus High Assurance): Develop "one-click" static analysis tool for Plinth contracts. ($777,140)
- Ouroboros Leios Implementation: Begin core implementation of Leios L1 consensus protocol. ($7,098,000)
- Cardano Node Architecture Refresh (Acropolis): Re-architect the Cardano node into a modular model (Acropolis). ($2,028,000)
- Hydra Development: Complete Hydra v1.0 mainnet and full audit, Cardano's L2 state channel solution. ($1,859,000)
- Minotaur AVS: Launch Minotaur, Actively Validated Service (AVS) leverage Cardano L1 security. ($1,900,000)
- Mithril Development: Enhance Mithril protocol for secure, efficient access. Speeds up sync, enables light clients. ($1,859,000)
- KES Agent: Implement security enhancement for SPO KES key storage and management. ($676,000)
- Ledger-HD: Move ledger state tables from memory to disk (LSM tech) to reduce RAM. ($1,352,000)
- Log-Structured Merge (LSM) including UTXO-HD: Integrate bespoke Well-Typed LSM-tree backend for managing on-disk state. ($1,352,000)
- Revised Stake Pool Incentive Scheme: Investigate potential adjustments to SPO incentive scheme. ($1,352,000)
- Nested Transactions (Babel Fees): Implement Nested Transactions ledger feature enabling tx batching. Facilitates Babel Fees. ($1,352,000)
- Plutus Core Roadmap: Execute roadmap for Plutus Core delivering key new primitives. ($2,704,000)
- Tiered Pricing Models (Plutus High Assurance): Introduce transaction prioritization mechanism to improve predictability during congestion. ($1,352,000)
- Transaction Monitoring System (Plutus High Assurance): Develop system to monitor transactions, detect potential fraud/anomalies. ($1,690,000)
- Maintenance and Support: Maintenance of existing code base, ongoing support. Includes cost of running Test & Tracing setup. ($14,682,000)
- Audit & Security Assurance: Engage independent audits and security assurance. Consolidated item. ($2,150,400)
GRAND TOTAL: $48,408,540
Problem Statement
This proposal addresses several critical challenges and opportunities within the Cardano ecosystem necessary for its continued growth, competitiveness, and decentralization. Key problems include:
- Scalability Limitations: The current L1 infrastructure faces throughput constraints during high demand, hindering user experience and application potential. There's a need for significant scaling solutions at both Layer 1 (consensus) and Layer 2.
- Node Architecture & Performance: The existing node design presents limitations in terms of modularity, extensibility, performance (especially RAM usage), and ease of contribution from diverse development teams.
- Smart Contract Assurance & Developer Experience: Developers require enhanced tools for ensuring the security, correctness, and efficiency of smart contracts to build trust and reduce risks. Improving the Plinth/Aiken/Plutarch ecosystem and providing robust testing/verification tools is essential.
- SPO Viability & Security: Ensuring the operational security of Stake Pool Operators (SPOs) and investigating the fairness and sustainability of the incentive mechanism is vital for network health and decentralization.
- User Experience & Adoption Barriers: Friction points like mandatory ADA fee payments and unpredictable transaction inclusion during congestion need addressing to improve usability and attract broader adoption.
- Ecosystem Competitiveness: Cardano needs to integrate emerging blockchain paradigms like Actively Validated Services (AVS) to remain competitive and offer diverse functionalities.
- Core Maintenance & Knowledge Transfer: The foundational codebase requires ongoing maintenance, modernization, technical debt reduction, and structured knowledge sharing to ensure stability and enable broader community participation in core development.
Proposal Benefit
In this proposal, IOE and its collaborators outline key core Cardano platform developments aimed at substantially improving network scalability, security, performance, and usability, while enhancing developer support.
Implementation of these initiatives offers substantial benefits across the Cardano community, which collectively, enhance Cardano's technical foundations, enabling it to support a larger, more complex, and more active ecosystem:
- For the Ecosystem: Delivers massive L1 throughput increase (Leios), robust L2 scaling (Hydra, Mithril), and positions Cardano competitively in new areas like AVS (Minotaur). Enhances overall network security, resilience, and decentralization. Fosters supplier diversity through knowledge sharing and modular architecture (Acropolis). The ROI stems from increased network capacity, utility, and attractiveness, driving adoption and value.
- For End Users: Experience significantly reduced network congestion and faster transaction processing (Leios), near-instant finality for specific applications (Hydra), the convenience of paying fees with native tokens (Nested Transactions/Babel Fees), and potentially more predictable transaction inclusion (Tiered Pricing). Enhanced security measures build user trust.
- For Developers & dApp Builders: Gain access to advanced tools for building more secure and efficient smart contracts (Plutus High Assurance suite, Plutus Core enhancements). Benefit from a more extensible and accessible node architecture (Acropolis), easier integration with L2s and light clients (Hydra, Mithril), and improved transaction capabilities (Nested Transactions). This lowers development barriers and enables more sophisticated applications.
- For Stake Pool Operators (SPOs): Benefit from significantly reduced node operational costs (lower RAM requirements via Ledger-HD, LSM/UTXO-HD), enhanced operational security (KES Agent), improved network performance, potential new revenue streams (Minotaur AVS), and a potentially fairer incentive structure (Revised Scheme investigation). Mithril improvements speed up node synchronization.
Key Proposal Deliverables
The tangible outcomes vary per initiative but collectively aim to significantly enhance Cardano's core infrastructure. Deliverables include:
- Core Protocol Enhancements: Mainnet integration of major upgrades like Ouroboros Leios (dramatically increasing L1 throughput) and Nested Transactions (enabling Babel Fees) via Hard Fork events.
- Architectural Improvements: A Proof-of-Concept and subsequent releases for the modular Acropolis node architecture, enabling greater extensibility and node diversity. Integration of the LSM backend improving on-disk state management (UTXO-HD, Ledger-HD) to significantly reduce node RAM requirements.
- L2 & Scaling Solutions: Audited release of Hydra Head v1.0, deployment of a live Minotaur AVS network, and enhanced Mithril protocol releases providing decentralized signature diffusion, node integration, and succinct proofs for faster syncing and light client support.
- Tooling & Developer Experience: Release of Plutus High Assurance tools (Automatic Formal Verification, Property Based Testing CLI/VSCode integration, Static Analyzer), delivery of new Plutus Core primitives (MSM, ModExp), compiler/library enhancements, and performance tooling (benchmarks, dashboards).
- Security & Operational Improvements: Implementation of the KES Agent for SPOs, delivery of a Transaction Monitoring System (Alpha backend/frontend), and research reports/potential implementation for the Revised SPO Incentive Scheme.
- Ongoing Maintenance: Continuous delivery of node releases, bug fixes, performance improvements, and knowledge transfer artifacts. Specific milestones, Software Readiness Level (SRL) targets, and detailed "Definition of Done" criteria will be defined for each initiative during contracting and execution phases.
Cost Breakdown
NOTE: Requested funding in this proposal are shown as USD ($) estimates only. Payment for services rendered will be requested in ADA. Provided this proposal is accepted, the USD-to-ADA rates will be determined during contracting process with Intersect. A placeholder price of $0.50 USD per ADA was used for calculation purposes, resulting in a placeholder USD-to-ADA conversion rate of 2.00 (1 USD = 2 ADA).
Resourcing & Duration
The estimated total development and audit resources required across these initiatives is 140-160 FTEs over the proposed 12-month development period (though specific initiative durations may vary). This largely consists of experienced IOE resources, supplemented by significant contributions from longstanding supporting collaborators, including but not limited to: Anastasia Labs, BCryptic, Galois, Globant, Greenwave, Lerna Labs, MLabs, Modus Create, Obsidian Systems, PaloIT, PNSol, Quviq, SAIB, Serokell, Sundae Labs, TxPipe, Vacuumlabs, and Well-Typed. IOE intends to work closely with Intersect to ensure knowledge sharing, technical education, and to foster a diverse supplier pool for Cardano's future.
Experience
Input Output (IO) realized Cardano's vision for a secure, scalable, decentralized platform through a research-driven, phased delivery (Byron to Voltaire). Leveraging formal methods, functional programming, and rigorous engineering, IO produced key achievements including Proof-of-Stake, Ouroboros consensus, Plutus smart contracts, native tokens, and scaling solutions like Hydra and Mithril.
IOE and its partners' involvement spans the entire existence of Cardano, and is demonstrated daily by its active development, support, and maintenance. Key personnel essential to this long-standing contribution are retained to continue this effort through 2025 and into 2026.
IO remains committed to furthering Cardano’s technical development, research and community engagement.
Maintenance & Support
Following development, formal verification, validation, and mainnet deployment, initiatives delivered under this proposal will transition into the ongoing Cardano Maintenance and Support scope. This scope includes essential activities like maintenance of the existing and new codebase, code modernization, addressing technical debt, bug fixes, disaster recovery, full node wallet maintenance/enhancements, and node performance improvements. A key aspect is preserving and sharing the vital knowledge embedded within the teams. While initially led by IOE, the intention is for these maintenance responsibilities to transition over time to a diverse range of capable ecosystem collaborators, supported by dedicated knowledge sharing and technical education efforts facilitated in collaboration with Intersect.
Supplementary Endorsement
Roadmap Alignment
Aligns to many of the Product Roadmap items and their goals: Developer / User Experience, Scaling the L1 Engine, Architectural Excellence, Leios, L2 Expansion, SPO Incentive Improvements, Multiple Node Implementations, Incoming Liquidity
Does your proposal align with any of the Intersect Committees?
Technical Steering Committee
Does this proposal align to the Product Roadmap and Roadmap Goals?
It supports the product roadmap
Administration and Auditing
Would you like Intersect to be your named Administrator, including acting as the auditor, as per the Cardano Constitution?
Yes
Ownership Information
Submitted On Behalf Of
CompanySocial Handles
X: @InputOutputHKKey Dependencies
While individual initiatives will have specific inbound and outbound dependencies managed during execution, several prominent dependencies significantly impact timelines and delivery capabilities across the portfolio:
- Ouroboros Leios Implementation: Critically depends on the successful integration of the Log-Structured Merge (LSM) backend (replacing LMDB), completion of Ledger-HD (moving remaining state to disk), and interactions with Network, Crypto, and Voting layers. It also requires analysis of its impact on Ouroboros Peras.
- Cardano Node Architecture Refresh (Acropolis): Relies on the Cardano Blueprint “Eidos” documentation initiative, the Pallas Rust libraries, and the Caryatid microservice framework.
- Mithril Development: Dependent on Cardano’s network layer and the development of specific mini-protocols for Mithril communication involving TxPipe and Cardano Node teams.
- Nested Transactions (Babel Fees): Implementation is contingent on prior successful hard forks and the finalization of features included in the target hard fork combinator event.
- Ledger-HD & UTXO-HD: Both depend on the successful integration of the LSM tree backend.
- Automatic Formal Verification (PHA): Leverages the Lean4 proof assistant and the Z3 SMT solver as backend components.
- Blueprint “Eidos” Documentation: Has outbound dependencies on the progress of Acropolis and Amaru (Rust Node).
Supporting Links
Cast Your Vote
Comments (15)
✅ Yes – A Structural Investment for Cardano’s Future
This proposal is not merely a set of feature enhancements. Rather, it represents a structural and strategic investment aimed at evolving Cardano into a nation-scale infrastructure platform.
It goes beyond temporary technical competition with Ethereum, Solana, or Polkadot, and instead advances Cardano’s unique vision: building a sustainable and formally grounded blockchain foundation for real-world adoption.
This proposal delivers on three core pillars: • ✅ Decentralization: A structure that enables broad participation from diverse SPOs and development vendors • ✅ Resilience: A robust infrastructure enabled by lightweight nodes and a modular architecture • ✅ Utility: Improved usability and responsiveness for dApp developers and end users
I highly value how this proposal integrates these elements at a high level and therefore cast my Yes vote in full support.
How IO select Labs partners?
This budget proposal is in competition for a similiar budget proposal in the Core category from the Intersect TSC. In choosing between the two, I am inclined to choose the one that is cheaper and more transparent, assuming the same level of quality. As it currently stands, the TSC proposal seems to be "winning" in that regard.
I have some questions for IOG in that regard:
- Can you elaborate on the cost breakdown and deliverables for the "Maintenance and Support" line item? 14.6 million USD seems high for maintanence work, especially when something like Leios, which arguably one of the most complex software projects to date, is less than half of that.
- Can you elaborate on the cost breakdown and deliverables for the "Revised Stake Pool Incentive Scheme" line item? There have been community efforts, CIPs, and ideas for several years about things that could be changed related to SPO incentives. And even now there is a community working group doing some of this work for free. 1.3 million USD seems high for something like this without clear deliverables.
Related to both of these questions is the fact that the TSC's proposal is currently the cheaper of the two. Some clarification on at least these two line items might go a long way to justify the additional costs that IOG is asking for.
-
If TSC's Budget is adopted, will IOG participate in the public bidding held by TSC?
-
Are there plans to create a separate Cardonao Budget proposal outlining items that are outside the scope of the TSC Budget but are within the scope of this proposal?
Supportive in general of many of the items in this proposal, but have concerns over lumping everything into a single proposal for a single binary yes / no vote. Would ideally like to see large budget proposals like this broken down into goals / projects / teams with separate budgets. Maybe a line item capability for voting would be useful. Have not voted yet at the time of this comment.
While there are many aspects of this I'd like to see, it's difficult to judge how much of these are truly important right now. If I were to break down maybe must haves or potential key critical components vs would like to haves, I can come up with 7 or 8 in this list which could save a few million (Leios, Multiple Node, Minotaur, Ledger-HD, KES, Plutus Core, Tiered Pricing, Maintenance/Support).
Regarding technology, it contains exactly what Cardano needs and what IOE is responsible for. The only thing I would like to see there is the implementation of a one-shot signature. However, this is a negligible detail.
I found these things in the document interesting and have further questions:
• It mentions the development costs of individual items for the year. It lacks a delivery date and a specification of what part will be delivered in one year. • Many people criticize the high maintenance costs. Maintenance also applies to the new codebase, so this is justifiable. I did not investigate how big the technology debt is. • The costs of some items seem enormous to me. For example, the Property Based Testing Tool for 2.3M USD or the Cardano Node Architecture Refresh for 2M USD. • The total requested amount is 48.4M USD. I would like to know more about the process of converting ADA to USD. For example, what will happen if the price of ADA is only 0.3 USD at the time of conversion? IOE would need half of NCL (it is not yet clear what NCL will be approved).
In general, I think IOG should provide more details.
I was mostly concerned with whether the costs are justifiable. The document says that 140-160 FTEs are expected over the proposed 12-month development period.
I calculated annual salary and overhead costs of 60% for 160 employees for the given average salary.
Average salary | Total costs 100,000 USD | 25.6M USD 200,000 USD | 51.2M USD 250,000 USD | 64M USD 300,000 USD | 76.8M USD
It seems that the average salary of employees will be around 200,000 USD. This is fair considering these figures:
• Median annual salary for an IT professional worldwide: $100,000 • In the US, it is: $140,000 (but can $240,000) • Typical full-stack developer: $65,000 • Uniswap is looking for devs for: $230,000 • Aptos is looking for devs for: $260,000 • Contractors cost 2x to 3x more than a typical employee.
It depends on where the developers are from. I don’t expect them all to be US-based and contractors. If all the developers were from Europe, I think the total cost could be $30M.
We all want the best available developers and researchers working on Cardano.
Cardano is developed using formal methods. That’s expensive.
I vote YES, but I would like to know more details about where the individual teams are from and how many of them will be working on specific projects.
Thank you I will wait for TSC's review before voting.
I am really excited by everything in this proposal ! Fits perfectly with what Cardano is about.
This proposal will make a major improvements for Cardano! LFG!!!
This is probably one where my pragmatism kicks in and I’ll support it. I have my concerns on spending in general which I’ve outlined, and think there’s a bit too much meat on some parts of this, but also recognise 1. IOG probably is already being somewhat modest in their request here in response to community discussions, 2. Most people want this. Not intending to be an ideological hardliner in these votes.
I like a lot of what i see here, however that needs to be complemented by a Business Strategy that needs to start alongside the development. Has this been given any thought? It would be good to draw a comparison against blocchain peers as a result of the implementatino of such features.
Some question that come to mind:
- AVS (Minautor): How would we compare against EigenLayer? how much market share do we expect to gain and how?
- Babbel fees: How do we compare with Ethereum introducing this with its Pectra release? Same for SUI/Radix. Will that specific implementation provide a unique advantage when it comes to Bicoint DeFi e.g.?
- Leios/Peras: What is the envisaged throughput gain expected? What will be the main differences with Solana (pros/cons) and how is that going to play in the marketing game against them?
- Hydra: Is there business segments in particular we want to attract (e.g. gaming, micro-tipping, advertizing markets, agentic AI)? How do we go about actually attracting those markets?
- Decrease/Removal of minADA: What is the impact on the security of the chain? How do we prevent from DDOS attacks?
- Plutus High Assurance: Are there concrete business sectors that have demanded this level of assurance? How much can this be marketed (e.g. NASA, Gov. voting)? If yes, what is the strategy to go after those clients and deliver?
LFG!!
Definitely should tie in review with the Technical Steering Committee for QA and Open Source Committee for keeping development in line with OS best practice on this worklaod with the amount of $ ask
BIG
Are You Ready to Participate?
Building Together to Drive Cardano Forward.