What they bring
Taxonomy, research methods, domain expertise, source discipline, evaluation criteria, and conflict disclosure.
PARTICIPANT 18 / 24
Track researchers and standards partners
Track partners maintain a vertical view of markets, projects, evidence quality, and standards while disclosing conflicts and judgment limits.
TrackStandard review
Typical participants
AI, RWA, DePIN, DeFi, payments, security, research institutes, and standards-development specialists.
Research · taxonomy · standards · vertical judgment
WCN role map
- Participant type
- track_researcher
- Primary role
- Track
- Supporting roles
- Capital · Service
- Review path
- Standard review
- Phase 1 path
- Eligible to apply for review.
PARTICIPATION FIT
What this participant brings—and what they may seek.
What they may seek
A governed research scope, evidence access, reviewable project signals, expert collaboration, and attributable insight work.
AI + HUMAN CONTROL
AI may prepare. People retain decision authority.
Track Radar Copilot
The workbench describes a bounded assistance pattern for intake, structure, checks, and drafts. It is not proof that a public AI product or integration is live.
Mandatory Human Gate
Track judgments, project recommendations, ranking criteria, standards claims, and conflicts of interest.
PUBLIC BOUNDARY
Participation is reviewed, not automatic.
Research, scoring, or recommendation remains a reviewed judgment, not certification or investment advice.
- Eligible to apply for review.
- Track judgments, project recommendations, ranking criteria, standards claims, and conflicts of interest.
- These tags name evidence categories for future reviewed work. They do not create public Proof, acceptance, settlement, certification, or endorsement.
Evidence vocabulary: track_proof · research_proof
Track