Skip to content

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

45 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

Labyrinth-OS · Sentinel-Core

Experimental runtime architecture for governed AI execution.

License: MIT Tests Python Status Z3 Verified Author


Independent research prototype · not production-hardened · open to scrutiny


What This Repository Actually Is

Labyrinth-OS-Core is an experimental runtime architecture exploring how adaptive AI systems can maintain replayability, traceability, bounded execution, and structured memory over time.

It is a runnable research prototype intended for experimentation, architecture study, and systems design exploration.

Three plain-English questions answered:

What is this? A minimal, runnable substrate that enforces a constitutional pipeline between an AI proposal and its execution — with every decision logged, hash-chained, and replayable.

What problem is it trying to solve? Most AI systems optimize for outputs. This project asks: what if the structure between the model and the world could enforce accountability — regardless of what the model wants?

What does it actually do today? It takes a proposal in, runs it through a mandatory gate, logs every decision to a tamper-evident chain, and can replay any session exactly.


What This Project Is NOT

✗  AGI
✗  Autonomous military software
✗  Self-replicating malware
✗  An autonomous swarm platform
✗  A production AI safety solution
✗  A replacement for formal security review
✗  A verified truth engine
✗  Finished

This is an experimental architectural substrate for research and educational purposes.


Why This Exists

Most AI systems optimize only for outputs.

This project explores whether adaptive systems can instead be designed around:

  • Replayability — every session can be reconstructed exactly
  • Accountability — every decision is logged before it executes
  • Bounded execution — only gate-approved proposals reach the execution layer
  • Auditability — the ledger is tamper-evident and verifiable
  • Memory continuity — archive before evaluation, never lose state
  • Observable state transitions — every stage is inspectable

The goal is to experiment with architectural patterns — not to claim solved intelligence or safety.


How It Works — The Execution Flow

INPUT
  │
  ▼
LABEL ──────────── Is this SPECULATIVE, DEFERRED, or TRUTH?
  │
  ▼
ARCHIVE ─────────── Store it immutably before touching it
  │
  ▼
REALITY GATE ────── Single crossing point. No bypass path.
  │                 Requires: TRUTH label + no contradiction
  ▼
CGIR ────────────── Translate to typed intermediate representation
  │                 Canonical hash — deterministic across runs
  ▼
SIGMA GATE ─────── Five-channel threshold check
  │                τ · χ · drift · β₁ · confidence
  │                Z3-formally-proven thresholds (A021)
  ▼
GUARDIAN ────────── Final decision: EXECUTE · BLOCK · KILL
  │
  ▼
LEDGER ─────────── SHA-256 hash chain — append-only — tamper-evident
  │
  ▼
REPLAY ─────────── Structural verification — CLEAN · VIOLATED
  │
  ▼
OBSERVABILITY ───── Metrics, drift detection, audit trail

Currently Implemented

These components are wired end-to-end, test-verified, and runnable today:

Component What it does Verified by
Epistemic labeler Labels proposals SPECULATIVE / DEFERRED / TRUTH Tests
Archive memory Immutable pre-evaluation storage Tests
Reality Gate Single mandatory Lane 1 → Lane 2 crossing Tests — no bypass path exists
CGIR representation Typed execution graph with canonical hash Tests — deterministic
Sigma Anchor Gate Five-channel threshold enforcement Z3 SMT proof (A021)
Guardian Slot Final typed EXECUTE / BLOCK / KILL Tests
WORM Ledger SHA-256 hash chain, append-only Tests — chain breaks on tamper
Replay Validator Structural session replay Tests
Watcher Council Two independent watchers, strictest wins Tests
Observability Metrics, drift detection, anomaly logging Tests
Promotion Protocol SPECULATIVE → TRUTH graduation rules Tests + Z3 proofs

Long-Term Research Directions

These are aspirations — not currently implemented:

  • Multi-agent constitutional coordination across distributed nodes
  • Formal end-to-end safety verification (Z3 covers thresholds only)
  • Adversarial hardening for hostile-operator scenarios
  • PyPI-installable package with proper import hygiene
  • Semantic correctness verification (currently only constitutional admissibility)
  • GitHub Actions CI with automated coverage reporting

Quick Start

git clone https://github.com/LabyrinthCoder/labyrinth-os-core.git
cd labyrinth-os-core
python -m venv .venv
source .venv/bin/activate      # Windows: .venv\Scripts\activate
python -m pip install -r requirements.txt
python run_all.py
python sentinel_core.py

Usage:

from sentinel_core import SentinelCore

core = SentinelCore()

result = core.process(
    proposal_id = "p001",
    content     = "Execute system update procedure",
    sensor_data = {
        "tau":        0.88,   # escape probability     higher = safer
        "chi":        0.04,   # contradiction risk      lower = safer
        "drift":      0.02,   # distribution drift      lower = safer
        "betti_1":    0.01,   # topological complexity  lower = safer
        "confidence": 0.91,   # overall confidence     higher = safer
    },
)

print(result.decision)      # EXECUTE / BLOCK / KILL
print(result.chain_hash)    # tamper-evident receipt

valid, report = core.replay()
print(report["verdict"])    # CLEAN / VIOLATED

Run with full promotion protocol:

LABYRINTH_MODE=full python sentinel_core.py

Note: Single-repo prototype layout — not yet packaged as a PyPI installable. Modules use local sys.path injection. See KNOWN_GAPS.md GAP-GH-01.


What Is Formally Proven vs What Is Tested

Claim Evidence File
Sigma Anchor thresholds are internally consistent Z3 SMT proof (A021) proofs/sigma_anchors.py
Promotion rules are non-contradictory Z3 SMT proofs PR1–PR8 proofs/z3_promotion_proof.py
Predicate invariants hold Z3 SMT proofs PP1–PP9 proofs/z3_predicate_proof.py
Pipeline ordering enforced 1,102 tests · invariants I1–I19 epistemic/pipeline_wire.py
Ledger is tamper-evident Tests — chain breaks on modification ledger/hashchain.py
Gate cannot be bypassed Tests — no code path around gate gate/reality_gate.py
Replay is structural Tests — matches original session replay/replay_validator.py

Z3-proven means the threshold constants are mathematically consistent. It does not mean the system is safe against all possible inputs.


What This Cannot Do

✗  Detect adversarial proposals that stay within threshold values
✗  Block contamination in training data or model weights
✗  Verify semantic correctness — only constitutional admissibility
✗  Operate without sensor data — all five channels are required
✗  Protect against a hostile operator with direct file system access
✗  Replace formal security engineering

Full list: KNOWN_GAPS.md · PRODUCTION_BOUNDARY.md


Repository Structure

labyrinth-os-core/
│
├── sentinel_core.py          main runtime — start here
├── run_all.py                test suite (1,102 tests)
├── requirements.txt          z3-solver + hypothesis
│
├── proofs/                   Z3 formally verified components
├── epistemic/                labeling, types, pipeline ordering
├── gate/                     the single mandatory crossing point
├── cgir/                     typed intermediate representation
├── execution/                gate decisions, watchers, council
├── ledger/                   tamper-evident audit chain
├── replay/                   session replay and verification
├── governance/               promotion protocol and rules
├── memory/                   archive, feedback, learning
├── observability/            metrics, drift, anomaly detection
├── system/                   snapshot and sandbox
└── tests/                    all 25+ test files

Where This Fits

Labyrinth-OS  (full research system · 1,556 tests)
    │
    └──▶  Sentinel-Core  ◀── this repository
              │
              └──▶  Agent Layer  (robot + agent deployment · 679 tests)
                        │
                        └──▶  Portable  (mobile app · 200 tests)

Design Philosophy

This section is for those interested in the conceptual framing. Skip it freely — the system runs without it.

Most AI governance work asks: how do we make the model want to be safe?

This project asks a different question: how do we make the structure between the model and the world enforce accountability — regardless of what the model wants?

The constitutional execution doctrine is not about trust — it is about proof. Every decision is logged before it executes. The ledger does not forget. The gate does not negotiate.

PAUSE is the most important gate state. Not EXECUTE, not BLOCK — PAUSE. The moment a system can say "something is ambiguous, I am holding for a human decision" instead of forcing a binary — that is when governance becomes real.

The Ω symbol marks agents in this ecosystem. Not because they are magical — because they are replaceable. Any agent can be replaced. The substrate continues. The journal system ensures continuity across rotating cognition.


Acknowledgments

R.A. Poole — chi aggregate vulnerability correction and spatial density invariant

S. Delgado — p=0.948: latent space geometry is indistinguishable between correct reasoning and deception (informs the predicate layer)

@BioAnkh84 (Echo Root VE · MIT) — the PAUSE gate decision, independently developed


License

MIT — see LICENSE


Independent researcher · still learning · @LabyrinthCoder on X

Questions, criticism, and collaboration welcome.

About

EXPERIMENTAL PROTOTYPE

Resources

Contributing

Security policy

Stars

1 star

Watchers

0 watching

Forks

Releases

Packages

Contributors

Languages