Debunking Deepbrain Chain
This entire article is excerpted from the broader piece I did on $NEO, which is the first part of a two-part series where I effectively show that the $NEO protocol cannot live up to its promises and this something that the developers more than likely have been aware of for some time, making it fraudulent.
Exploring the Deepbrain Chain
According to the English version of the project’s website, “DeepToken [native asset of DeepBrain Chain] is the world’s first digital asset exchange dedicated to AI industry with an innovative ‘Voting is Mining’ mechanism. It aims to discover quality tokens in the AI industry. DPT is a token issued by DeepToken Exchange, it is the basis for organizing the platform’s ecosystem building and community autonomy.” 
So, in many ways, the idea is similar to that of Loopring that was just covered above. However, the primary difference is that it alleges to incorporate the use of ‘AI’ (Artificial Intelligence) in its process.
According to ICO data aggregated by the website, ‘ICODrops’, Deepbrain Chain raised $11.75 million via its token sale, which took place in late 2017 and ended officially on December 15th, 2017.
There is little outside financial information that is known about the project and there aren’t a plethora of details on the project itself either.
However, what is known is that it has been funded by GSR Ventures, Gobi Partners and Qianshi Capital. In total, these groups raised a cumulative $5 million (USD) for the project in addition to the funding that it received from the ICO crowdsale that was performed in late 2017. 
For some reason, it has been reported through numerous different outlets by several different credible sources that NEO Council (subsidiary of $NEO) was one of the direct investors into Deepbrain Chain.
However, any and all links verifying this information have been obfuscated tremendously.
For example, in a community thread posted on the Deepbrain Chain subreddit, speculation was raised as to whether Deepbrain Chain was/is sponsored or funded, at least in part, by $NEO or one of its controlled subsidiaries. 
The question was met with several affirmations and even a link confirming such. However, the link has since been 404’d.
However, there is one lead that gives credence to the idea that NEO Council was involved with the funding of Deepbrain Chain.
When visiting the website ‘NEO Global Capital’, there are a list of partners that are displayed on the front page. When scrolling down, the name ‘Roger Lim’ shows up.  Roger Lim is also one of only two principle partners in GSR Ventures. 
However, this is not definitive and in lieu of a verified source to unequivocally state such, the assertion cannot be made in this publication.
Obfsucation in the Team’s Leadership (Mix-ins with $NEO, which it contends that it is entirely independent of)
He Yong (CEO) — “ He was once enrolled in a Ph.D. program at East China Normal University and Chinese Academy of Sciences.”
Chaunfeng Lee (CMO) — “ He has a Master’s in Architectural from the Research Institute of MCC Group.”
Dongyan Wang (Chief AI Officer, Executive VP) — “ Dr. Wang has almost 20 years of Silicon Valley experience in artificial intelligence, business intelligence and data science, leading world class, industry award winning, global high-tech organizations as senior executive for Global Fortune 500 enterprises (Cisco, NetApp, Midea Group, Samsung) and a successful startup.”
Christine Chang (President) — “ The Co-Founder of Silicon Valley RobotX Incubator. Obtained Marketing and Project Management professional skills from UC Berkeley 2013 program.”
Jason Pai (Sr. Director of Product Management) — “ ason Pai brings forward over 15 years of experience with hardware development and product management with Supermicro, IBM, and Ford Motor.”
Cindy Wang (H.R. Director) — “ She is passionate about aligning people and culture to support organization and business.She has devoted 17 years to human resource management.”
On the DeepBrain Chain’s website, underneath a section titled, ‘Partnership in Blockchain Technology’, NEO Council is listed, which is a subsidiary of the $NEO team.
Debunking the Idea of Deepbrain Chain
Perhaps the most cogent response to the practicality of Deepbrain Chain’s value offering in their press releases and materials is that the idea, in a practical sense, more than likely would not work in its current iteration.
The fundamental underpinning of the Deepbrain Chain project is that it is meant to, “Provide a low-cost, private, flexible, safe, and decentralized artificial intelligence computing platform to artificial intelligence products.” It also claims that it can, “Make the artificial intelligence neural network operation decentralized and distributed over the mass nodes of the whole world through blockchain technology.”
The skepticism among some experts in the field of artificial intelligence comes from the fact that the requirements of artificial intelligence, specifically the parallelism aspect of neural networks (which must be created in order to facilitate such an idea).
Essentially, parallelism, in computing, refers to the idea of having more than one computer working on a specific ‘problem’ or issue at the same time. When applied to artificial intelligence, it implies that the computers that are all connected in the network will aggregate the information at the same time and then coordinate with one another (this is where the neural network bit comes in), in order to cohesively formulate an automated solution (artificial intelligence) that is then executed by the system. 
As one can imagine, this process is complex and extremely data-intensive. Modern computing and technology has not yet mastered the art of created ‘massively parallel’ system that are capable of achieving the goals that Deepbrain Chain purports to accomplish in their value offering. This is an assertion that is corroborated by modern research conducted by MIT researchers and published by the American Association for Artificial Intelligence.