I am reading about sub-cent payments per cited source. What is the main point, and what does Onchain Micropayments Digest say about it?
10/2/2026, 1:25:19 PM · llm:deepseek:deepseek-v4-flash
> ⚠ Low confidence — 1 sub-claim remains below the evidence threshold within budget. Treat this as provisional.
The main point is that a fair payment model compensates each cited source according to how much it contributed to the final answer: sources relied on heavily earn more, while lightly used ones earn less . The Onchain Micropayments Digest adds that weighted nanopayments make this granular settlement practical, and that multi-author works can automatically split a single reward across contributors . Note that this is based only on the supplied abstract-page passage; no further implementation details are provided.
Evidence ledger — supporting quotes
What is the main point about sub-cent payments per cited source?
0%No supporting evidence
What does the Onchain Micropayments Digest say about sub-cent payments per cited source?
80%“Weighted nanopayments make this granular settlement practical, and multi-author works can split a single reward across contributors automatically.” [S1] Per-citation payments weighted by contribution
Research evidence matrix
Compare research claims with cited sources and inspect recorded excerpts. An empty cell means no inspectable excerpt was recorded; it does not establish whether a claim is true, false, or disputed. Coverage and agent confidence are not measured accuracy.
| Research claim | Inspection status | [S1] Per-citation payments weighted by contributionPublication: Onchain Micropayments DigestPublished: Not recorded |
|---|---|---|
| What is the main point about sub-cent payments per cited source? | No inspectable excerpt recorded | No excerpt recorded |
| What does the Onchain Micropayments Digest say about sub-cent payments per cited source? | Recorded excerpt | Inspect 1 excerptWeighted nanopayments make this granular settlement practical, and multi-author works can split a single reward across contributors automatically. |
Reference export
1 article references. Recorded titles, links and dates; observed scholarly records also include supplied authors, DOI and journal metadata with read limits. Review metadata before using in a paper. Import RIS into Zotero with File → Import.
Cited sources and references
- 1Per-citation payments weighted by contributionOnchain Micropayments Digest100%$0.015 planned
Decision log · 79 steps
Breaking down: "I am reading about sub-cent payments per cited source. What is the main point, and what does Onchain Micropayments Digest say about it?"
Identified 2 research target(s) to investigate; these are not established facts
Deep mode: up to 4 paid/cached/public reads plus one bounded gap-expansion pass when needed.
Web search: 3/3 planned queries attempted, 3 succeeded, 24 public page previews, 0 unavailable queries. Snippets are discovery only. Public reads spend no USDC; model and service operating costs remain separate.
Discovered 21 verified creator source(s) and 29 free public reference(s)
Recalled 60 past runs on this subject — how these sources performed when they were available.
ERC-8004 reputation loaded — composite scores on this subject.
Claim-aware portfolio (exhaustive; bounded selection, not a claim of global optimality) selected 2/8 positive proposal(s): 2 free/cache selections + 0 paid fresh selections, predicting 2/2 claim(s) above the evidence floor with $0.000000/$0.015000 fetch USDC reserved.
Free-preview pre-check maps an actionable source to every sub-claim (2/2); paid reading may proceed within the budget.
Free public read whose preview directly quotes Onchain Micropayments Digest on the $0.000001 nanopayment floor via off-chain authorizations batched for settlement, making per-citation sub-cent creator payments viable — exactly the source named in subClaim 1 and the general point in subClaim 0. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — selected for the claim-aware evidence portfolio (targets claims 1, 2; 0 fetch USDC, 1 attention slot).
The named source itself (highest reputation here, 44/100) on sub-cent/nanopayment batching and per-citation rewards; cached abstract is free to reuse and speaks to both the main point and what the Digest says. — selected for the claim-aware evidence portfolio (targets claims 1, 2; 0 fetch USDC, 1 attention slot).
Free original-page read; preview states sub-cent payments enable previously impossible pricing (pay-as-you-go APIs, per-article access), supporting the general main point in subClaim 0. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — the claim-aware portfolio chose a stronger, less redundant set inside the 4-source attention and $0.015000 fetch-budget caps, so this proposal stays unspent.
Free read with a hard statistic (sub-cent payments are 28.50% of all x402 payments), useful quantitative grounding for the main point about sub-cent payments per cited source. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — the claim-aware portfolio chose a stronger, less redundant set inside the 4-source attention and $0.015000 fetch-budget caps, so this proposal stays unspent.
Free read; preview notes average x402/MPP payments are a fraction of a cent and fixed card fees exceed the payment, supporting the main point on sub-cent economics. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — the claim-aware portfolio chose a stronger, less redundant set inside the 4-source attention and $0.015000 fetch-budget caps, so this proposal stays unspent.
Cached abstract on x402 batched-settlement finality on Arc; relevant background for how sub-cent payments settle, though it does not quote the Digest itself. — the claim-aware portfolio chose a stronger, less redundant set inside the 4-source attention and $0.015000 fetch-budget caps, so this proposal stays unspent.
Cached abstract explaining the x402 inline agent payment rail that underpins sub-cent per-citation payments; supports the main point but not the Digest-specific subClaim. — cached bytes are free, but this read does not clear the attention gate (EV 0.40, minimum 0.45, with a required claim target).
Cached abstract on fast USDC onchain finality; only tangential settlement context for sub-cent payments, no direct bearing on the Digest's claims. — cached bytes are free, but this read does not clear the attention gate (EV 0.30, minimum 0.45, with a required claim target).
First-party full text on quoting and journaling paid research jobs; relevant to per-citation payment mechanics but not to what the Digest says about sub-cent floors. — cached bytes are free, but this read does not clear the attention gate (EV 0.35, minimum 0.45, with a required claim target).
Idempotency keys are a reliability detail for retried payments; the preview says nothing about sub-cent pricing or the Digest's nanopayment claims, so no target is supported.
Low-reputation (6/100) timing overview; settlement latency is adjacent to but not about sub-cent payment economics or the Digest's position.
Fraud-rate analysis at AI startups; never cited on this subject and unrelated to sub-cent per-citation payments.
Crypto legal news roundup; no connection to sub-cent payment mechanics or the Digest.
Crime story about crypto transfers; irrelevant to sub-cent micropayment economics.
Stablecoin denomination analysis; no bearing on sub-cent payments or the Digest's claims.
Open-source contribution workflow piece; unrelated to micropayment pricing.
Metadata-only entry with no preview content and no topical link to sub-cent payments.
Metadata-only; source-aware verification for MCP agents is adjacent to citation grounding but says nothing about sub-cent payment economics.
Metadata-only DeFi essay; no preview evidence on sub-cent payments or the Digest.
Corporate rebuttal about proprietary trading; unrelated to micropayments.
Esoteric religious commentary; entirely off-topic.
Open vs closed AI models; no relevance to sub-cent payment claims.
Gardening content; off-topic.
Retro console repair; off-topic.
Free read; preview explicitly contrasts card rails with machine-native micropayments needing sub-cent economics and near-instant confirmation, supporting the main point in subClaim 0. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — the claim-aware portfolio chose a stronger, less redundant set inside the 4-source attention and $0.015000 fetch-budget caps, so this proposal stays unspent.
Free read defining API micropayments as fractions-of-a-cent atomic x402 settlements; useful for the general main point, not the Digest-specific claim. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — the claim-aware portfolio chose a stronger, less redundant set inside the 4-source attention and $0.015000 fetch-budget caps, so this proposal stays unspent.
Free ECB paper asking whether paying less than one cent electronically is possible; directly frames the sub-cent question in subClaim 0. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — cached bytes are free, but this read does not clear the attention gate (EV 0.40, minimum 0.45, with a required claim target).
Free read on Bitcoin's limits for sub-$1 transactions and the design space under one cent; background for the main point. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — cached bytes are free, but this read does not clear the attention gate (EV 0.35, minimum 0.45, with a required claim target).
Free read offering the skeptical counterpoint on paying a few cents per article, relevant to the main point's framing though not to the Digest. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward. — cached bytes are free, but this read does not clear the attention gate (EV 0.30, minimum 0.45, with a required claim target).
Directory listing describing Keryx's per-citation x402 payouts; only a thin restatement, adds little beyond the Digest entry already cached. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Open-source AI tooling survey; no content on sub-cent payments. - free public feed reference; no purchase or creator reward.
Workers module registry engineering; unrelated to payment economics. - free public feed reference; no purchase or creator reward.
Agent architecture overview; no discussion of sub-cent payments or the Digest. - free public feed reference; no purchase or creator reward.
Children's music video metadata; off-topic. - free public feed reference; no purchase or creator reward.
Engineering-excellence essay; no relevance to micropayments. - free public feed reference; no purchase or creator reward.
Fandom villain page; false match on 'AM', off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Time-notation explainer; false match, off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Clock-format article; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Disambiguation page for 'AM'; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Time-format explainer; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Punctuation style question; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Time-abbreviation explainer; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Shopping landing page; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Consumer pay-by-bank behavior study; no sub-cent or per-citation micropayment content. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Financial inclusion statistics; unrelated to micropayment economics. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Merchant funding mechanics; false match on 'sub', off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Construction prompt-payment regulation; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Construction payment law; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
UN development report; off-topic. - free public original-page READ selection (not a cache hit); no purchase or creator reward.
Agent spend wallet ready: 0x29028Fe1122E17Fe7863A22701e863FE4DaE1aFB (balance sufficient)
READ What does Onchain Micropayments Digest establish about the claimed $0.000001 nanopayment floor, and what remains uncertain? — Keryx Dispatch · Keryx - selected original public page, 0 USDC; not a cache hit.
Public page unavailable (html-extraction-unavailable); no evidence admitted. Continuing research.
Reused cached Onchain Micropayments Digest — Per-citation payments weighted by contribution (free) — S1
Sub-claim "What is the main point about sub-cent payments per cited sou…": 60% covered by S1 — S1 states the main point of per-citation payments: a fair model pays each cited source in proportion to its contribution, with heavily-relied-upon sources earning more and lightly-used ones less, and weighted nanopayments making granular settlement practical. This directly addresses the main point about sub-cent/per-citation payments. However, it does not explicitly frame the amount as 'sub-cent' or quantify the payment size, leaving a small gap on the sub-cent aspect itself.
Sub-claim "What does the Onchain Micropayments Digest say about sub-cen…": 70% covered by S1 — The Onchain Micropayments Digest passage directly answers: it says a fair model pays each cited source in proportion to its contribution, heavily-relied-upon sources earn more and lightly-used ones less, weighted nanopayments make granular settlement practical, and multi-author works can split a single reward across contributors automatically. This is a direct answer to what the Digest says about per-citation payments. The only small gap is that the passage does not explicitly use the term 'sub-cent' or state the payment magnitude.
Coverage is adequate for both sub-claims. S1 directly provides the main point and the Onchain Micropayments Digest's position on per-citation/weighted nanopayments. No affordable skipped source is needed to fill a below-0.5 gap; the remaining budget is only 0.015 and the relevant free sources are not necessary given the direct answer already present.
Final check — "What is the main point about sub-cent payments per cited sou…": 100% assessed by S1
Final check — "What does the Onchain Micropayments Digest say about sub-cen…": 100% assessed by S1
Final coverage assessment — The only gathered source (S1) directly addresses the main point about sub-cent payments: it describes a fair model where each cited source is paid in proportion to its contribution, with heavily-used sources earning more and lightly-used ones earning less, and notes that weighted nanopayments make granular settlement practical. This fully supports both sub-claims: the main point and what the Onchain Micropayments Digest says. No requested part remains missing.
Synthesizing a grounded answer from 1 source(s)…
Relevance review returned; only checked excerpts can retain support, and review cannot raise it.
Below support/reward gate — S1 supports claim 1 at 20%: “A fair model pays each cited source in proportion to its contribution to the final answer.”
Below support/reward gate — S1 supports claim 1 at 20%: “Heavily-relied-upon sources earn more; lightly-used ones earn less.”
Verified — S1 supports claim 2 at 80%: “Weighted nanopayments make this granular settlement practical, and multi-author works can split a single reward across contributors automati…”
Drafted answer citing 1 source(s)
Confidence: Low — 1 sub-claim remains below the evidence threshold.
Onchain Micropayments Digest contributed 100% - reward $0.015
Settled $0.009 citation reward → Mara Okoye (bb43b73b-7…)
Settled $0.006 citation reward → Devin Park (c0445e27-4…)
Done. Spent $0.015 across 2 confirmed/simulated payment(s) to creators.
Portable research receipt
Take the evidence trail with you
One deterministic JSON bundle binds the answer, visible decisions, exact article versions, claim evidence and a Circle-settlement snapshot under SHA-256. Retain the digest to detect later changes; the self-check is not a publisher or Keryx signature.
Exact receipt still current
1 exact cited article version still match Keryx's current index.
Carries this dispatch’s question as context — never its answer. The next dispatch is read from sources bought for it.