1.1 The "Oracle Problem" in Commercial Transactions

In the fields of computer science and blockchain, smart contracts are regarded as "vending machines": input the correct tokens, and output the determined goods. This works well in purely digital native environments (such as ERC-20 swaps on Uniswap), because both inputs and outputs are on the chain, and the state is objective.

However, once transactions involve off-chain entities or non-standardized services, we encounter the well-known "The Commercial Oracle Problem".

1.1.1 Definition & The Semantic Gap

We formally define the "commercial oracle problem" as follows:

A Turing-complete blockchain network cannot verify the authenticity and quality of external physical world events without introducing centralized trust assumptions.

This is not just a matter of data acquisition, but a deeper semantic gap (Semantic Gap):

• The on-chain world (On-chain) understands that:uint256 amount, address recipient, bool isPaid. These are binary and objective.

• Off-chain commerce includes:Is the service quality up to standard?、Is the design drawing original?Is the goods damaged?These are diverse and subjective.

Smart contracts cannot execute the following logic:

$$f(x) = \begin{cases} \text{Release Funds} & \text{if Service is "Good"} \\ \text{Refund} & \text{if Service is "Bad"} \end{cases}$$

Because the EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine) cannot compute the boolean values of "Good" or "Bad".

1.1.2 Systemic Failures of Current Solutions

Before the emergence of OmniPact, the market attempted to solve this problem through the following methods, but all of them had fatal flaws:

A. Multi-sig Wallets

• Mechanism: The buyer, the seller, and a third-party arbitrator hold private keys, and the payment is released upon 2/3 signatures.

• Defect: Introduced the "specific trusted entity risk".

  • Collusion Risk: Arbitrators may be bribed to collude with one party to steal funds.

  • Single Point of Failure (SPOF): If the arbitrator's private key is lost or the arbitrator is out of contact, it will lead to a permanent deadlock of funds.

  • Non-scalability: It is difficult to find trustworthy third parties for massive amounts of tiny transactions on a global scale.

B. Centralized Data Feeds

• Mechanism: Rely on a single API (such as the FedEx interface) to confirm the logistics status.

• Defect: Source Sybil Attack.

  • API data may be tampered with by hackers.

  • The logistics status in the real world may be falsified (such as "brushing orders with empty packages"), and simply putting data on the chain cannot verify "whether there is goods in the package".

C. Simple Tokenization

• Mechanism: Directly issue real estate as NFT.

• Defect: Decoupling Risk.

  • Owning an on-chain NFT is not equivalent to owning the legal ownership of an offline real estate property. If the original owner sells the house to someone else in reality, the on-chain NFT becomes a worthless air coin. It lacks "Enforceability" at the legal level.

1.1.3 OmniPact's Solution Path: Objectification of Subjective Truth (Subjective Truth Objectification)

OmniPact recognizes that the verification of commercial transactions is inherently a matter of social consensus, not merely a problem of code calculation.

To solve this problem, we did not attempt to make smart contracts "understand" reality; instead, we constructed a mechanism to transform subjective real-world states into objective game theory equilibria:

1. Deterministic Layer (L1 Determinism): Utilizes OES (Omni Escrow System) to handle the locking and release of funds, ensuring basic atomicity and eliminating the risk of "taking the money and running away".

2. Probabilistic Layer (L2 Probabilistic Truth): Utilizes DAN (Decentralized Arbitration Network) to handle state verification. Through the Schelling Point mechanism, it incentivizes mutually unfamiliar arbitrators to converge on the same "truth" in non-cooperative games.

OmniPact is not eliminating risks, but managing and pricing them. We transform the uncertainties in commercial transactions (the oracle problem) into a computable, programmable, and hedgeable on-chain protocol risk, thereby laying the theoretical and technical foundation for large-scale commercial applications of Web3.