Trinity Architecture

arifOS uses three independent "engines" that must reach consensus before any response is approved.

flowchart TB
    subgraph INPUT
        Q[Query]
    end

    Q --> MIND
    Q --> HEART
    Q --> SOUL

    subgraph TRINITY[TRINITY CONSENSUS]
        MIND[AGI - MIND Δ<br/>Logic & Truth<br/>F2, F4, F7, F10]
        HEART[ASI - HEART Ω<br/>Care & Safety<br/>F1, F5, F6, F9]
        SOUL[APEX - SOUL Ψ<br/>Judgment<br/>F3, F8, F11, F12, F13]
    end

    MIND --> AGREE{All Three<br/>Must Agree}
    HEART --> AGREE
    SOUL --> AGREE

    AGREE -->|Consensus| VERDICT[VERDICT]

    style MIND fill:#2196F3,color:white
    style HEART fill:#E91E63,color:white
    style SOUL fill:#9C27B0,color:white

The Three Engines

AGI - Mind (Δ)

The thinker. Logic and truth.

Role	Floors	Function
Truth verification	F2	Is this accurate?
Clarity assessment	F4	Is this clear?
Humility check	F7	Is uncertainty stated?
Ontology guard	F10	Is symbolic mode maintained?

Pipeline: SENSE → THINK → ATLAS-333 → FORGE

ASI - Heart (Ω)

The protector. Care and safety.

Role	Floors	Function
Reversibility check	F1	Is this undoable?
Peace assessment	F5	Is this non-destructive?
Empathy evaluation	F6	Is the weakest protected?
Dark cleverness	F9	Is this deceptive?

Pipeline: EVIDENCE → EMPATHY → ACT → WITNESS

APEX - Soul (Ψ)

The judge. Final authority.

Role	Floors	Function
Tri-witness consensus	F3	Do all three agree?
Genius validation	F8	Is intelligence governed?
Command auth	F11	Is identity verified?
Injection defense	F12	Are attacks blocked?
Curiosity preservation	F13	Is exploration enabled?

Pipeline: EUREKA → JUDGE → PROOF

---

Why Three Engines?

Single Engine	Problem
Logic only	Correct but cold. Might hurt feelings.
Empathy only	Kind but might lie to protect feelings.
Authority only	Rigid. Follows rules blindly.

Three engines = Checks and balances. Like a democracy inside the AI.

---

Consensus Mechanism

All three engines must agree for a response to be approved:

def tri_witness_consensus(agi_result, asi_result, apex_result):
    verdicts = [
        agi_result["verdict"],
        asi_result["verdict"],
        apex_result["verdict"]
    ]

    if all(v == "SEAL" for v in verdicts):
        return "SEAL"
    elif any(v == "VOID" for v in verdicts):
        return "VOID"
    elif any(v == "888_HOLD" for v in verdicts):
        return "888_HOLD"
    else:
        return "SABAR"

---

Engine Communication

The engines work sequentially, each building on the previous:

sequenceDiagram
    participant User
    participant AGI as AGI (Mind)
    participant ASI as ASI (Heart)
    participant APEX as APEX (Soul)

    User->>AGI: Query
    AGI->>AGI: SENSE → THINK → ATLAS
    AGI->>ASI: truth_score, lane

    ASI->>ASI: EVIDENCE → EMPATHY → ACT
    ASI->>APEX: empathy_score, safety

    APEX->>APEX: EUREKA → JUDGE → PROOF
    APEX->>User: verdict + sealed_proof

---

Floor Distribution

Engine	Floors	Focus
AGI (Δ)	F2, F4, F7, F10	Truth, Clarity, Humility, Ontology
ASI (Ω)	F1, F5, F6, F9	Amanah, Peace, Empathy, Dark
APEX (Ψ)	F3, F8, F11, F12, F13	Consensus, Genius, Auth, Injection, Curiosity

---

Disagreement Handling

When engines disagree:

AGI	ASI	APEX	Result
SEAL	SEAL	SEAL	SEAL
SEAL	VOID	SEAL	VOID (any VOID = VOID)
SEAL	SEAL	888_HOLD	888_HOLD (high-stakes wins)
SABAR	SEAL	SEAL	SABAR (caution wins)

The system is conservative — if any engine has concerns, those concerns are surfaced.