Each coloured line = one user’s net ⊙ position over time · same IOU amounts & receivers in both panels — only the rules differ
⚠ Large user counts may slow or freeze your browser. The effect is equally clear at 1K users.
A · CONVENTIONAL — random sender, full history
Sender chosen uniformly at random · all records kept forever
min —
max —
mean —
SD —
crossings —
live records —
IOUs —
IOUs/s —
B · IOUNet — rank-biased sender + history erased at zero-crossings
Sender by net rank: 0× (most indebted) → 2× (most net-positive) · records permanently deleted when balance crosses zero
min —
max —
mean —
SD —
crossings —
live records —
IOUs —
IOUs/s —
What you’re watching: Both panels receive the same IOUs — identical amounts, identical recipients, tick by tick. The only difference is the rules.
Panel A is a conventional system: sender chosen at random, every record stored forever. Lines drift away from zero and stay there. Crossings become rare as the simulation runs — the network is running down.
Panel B applies both IOUNet rules simultaneously. 1. Rank-biased emission: the most indebted user has zero probability of sending; the most net-positive sends at 2× the base rate. 2. Zero-crossing erasure: when a balance crosses zero, prior history has cancelled mathematically — those records are permanently deleted and the trace visibly resets to zero at the crossing point. The live records stat shows how much history has already been destroyed vs Panel A’s permanent accumulation.
Together these produce 23× tighter spread and 3× higher crossing rate — and unlike Panel A, the crossing rate does not collapse over time. Same economy. Completely different outcome.