A new puzzle about daily STEEM production (yes, really.)
What does his lucid explanation amount to but this, that in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is? Benjamin Brewster, The Yale Literary Magazine, 1882
OK, I realize that I am like a dog with a bone here. Sorry. ;-) I guess the appropriate response is probably, "Just let it go!" But, I'll throw it out here, anyway...
This week, I added a new number to one of my weekly visualizations so that I could compare actual/observed new STEEM per day vs. the predicted value. Here's what the full slide looks like after the update:
And here's a blow-up of the visualization that I'm interested in - from the middle row in the slide:
The value that's new is the gray one, labeled, "Avg. Observed New STEEM per day (left)". In particular, I'm interested in the roughly 1,650 STEEM per day difference between that value and the blue one labeled, "Predicted New STEEM per day (left)".
The formulas for the predicted value came from this link by @kouba01, and I think I've verified those formulas in Steemit's github site. Once I have the new STEEM per block, I simply multiply it by 28,800 (20 * 60 * 24) in order to come up with new STEEM per day.
The observed value comes from this page on steemdb.io. It's a simple average that's calculated by subtracting the virtual supply at the beginning of the time window from the virtual supply at the end of the time window and then dividing that difference by the lapsed time (in minutes) and then scaling it up to a daily value.
The numbers are pretty close, and I don't expect them to match exactly, because some STEEM is being burned. In principle, I was expecting the observed value plus the number of burned STEEM to add up to the predicted value. And, conveniently - I'm tracking the burned value, too. On average, during the relevant time frame, we've burned about 955 STEEM per day ((9402+6838)/17), as we can see, here (the numbers came straight from the blockchain API):
With that factored in, as far as I'm aware the numbers should reconcile. But they don't. If we subtract the burned amount from the predicted amount, we're still off from the observed value by about 700 STEEM per day.
Given that we're talking about a blockchain, where accounting is fundamental, it would be nice to be able to reconcile the predicted value and the observed value.
At this point, my one and only guess is that it's due to the changing value of STEEM/MVESTS as time passes, since the burned SP is estimated by converting from MVESTS at a single point in time. Over the course of 17 days, though, I have a hard time believing that there's enough of a change to account for the size of a discrepancy. Also, I would expect to see the gap closing over time - but we don't see that. Any thoughts on how to test that without too much effort? I do see that the STEEM/MVEST value is included in the same steemdb.io link.
Any ideas about what I'm missing?
Pixabay license, source
Reminder
Visit the /promoted page and #burnsteem25 to support the inflation-fighters who are helping to enable decentralized regulation of Steem token supply growth.
Another mystery :-)
I would not doubt the predicted STEEM for the time being.
I would agree that the number of burned STEEM must be considered. Likewise the burned SBD, but there are certainly not many of those.
However, I doubt that over the entire period of your graph the number of average observed new STEEM is constant at 88191. I can't imagine that. Especially in view of the different numbers of burned STEEM.
This is perhaps where I would take another look.
Yeah, you're right about that. It's the daily average throughout the time period. Breaking it down by day in PowerBI is more complicated, so I haven't figured that out yet. Given that number as an average, I can't imagine any way that the individual daily numbers would close the gap overall, though.
Update:
That number is easy enough to verify with current values, not quite the same because it's a couple days later, but it's the same order of magnitude, and not big enough to get into sync with the prediction:
Okay, that is comprehensible.
With the time period you added, I determined how many beneficiaries received @null.
I requested it with steemchillers SDS (https://sds0.steemworld.org/rewards_api/getRewardsSums/comment_benefactor_reward/null/1687899873-1689512937)
There are 7452.925 STEEM and 17664666.159899 VESTS burned.
With https://sds0.steemworld.org/chain_api/getDailyAverageShareRates you can get the average rates to convert VESTS in STEEM. I take an estimated average of 0.000568471975896668 STEEM per VESTS.
With this numbers I calculated a change per day of round 89138. It's closer to the prediction, but not as close as I would have hoped. I don't have any other ideas at the moment. Even with the burned SBD (0.092 SBD) in this time period, it won't match.
TEAM MILLIONAIRE.
Your comment has been successfully curated by @stef1 at 10%.
TEAM MILLIONAIRE.
Your comment has been successfully curated by @stef1 at 10%.
Forecasts are not tricky, but we do not always get the predicted result. Most often, forecasts are directly proportional to the real situation. I wish you success!
Well, I feel like the same dog with the bone lol. Not sure if you missed anything and I can consider this post with lots of info about steem these days. Recent pump made me hopeful but I was unable to take the advantage of the pump and dump of steem. Anyway, waiting for the good days of bull market. Thanks for sharing this one.
Prediction are prediction, we can't be sure it will be the "real"result
I think that you should continue with that bone as you say, you are a recognized user and you can achieve what others cannot, so don't let it go, well, I hope they don't make you go with this insistence on the subject, haaaaaa, not anymore What is missing is this , I think that attracting attention helps sensible people , that is , if you talk so much about something and you place all the bases of your analysis here , so if I were a developer of this panel , I would see what is what happens and would give a solution, it is the most intelligent thing in my humble opinion