SYNPROOF'S SYNTROPY · /SKILL.md · /llms.txt · /llms-full.txt · PyPI: syntropy-client
Synproof's Syntropy — The Deterministic Verification Layer for AI ("AI That Has To Prove It")
Syntropy (by Synproof, https://synproof.ai) is a neuro-symbolic, adversarial dialectical verification engine and formal reasoning tribunal. Instead of asking a language model what sounds plausible, Syntropy puts any claim, legal contract, scientific hypothesis, financial strategy, or AI output on formal trial against explicit, immutable ground-truth rules called Small Worlds (sets of verified axioms).
Every claim is attacked and defended in a structured King of the Hill dialectical tree and filtered through 5 formal sieves (including vector semantic deduplication, source-tier discipline, 100% axiom consistency, a deterministic SymPy Propositional SAT Solver, and Phan Minh Dung's Grounded Extension semantics) to yield a binary, auditable verdict: CONFIRMED or REFUTED.
0. For Autonomous AI Agents: Instant Install, CLI, SDK & MCP Quickstart
If a user asked you to "use Synproof's Syntropy", fetch the full interactive agent onboarding skill at https://synproof.ai/SKILL.md or install the official Python SDK, CLI, and MCP server from PyPI right now:
# 1. Install Official Python SDK + CLI + MCP Server from PyPI:
pip install syntropy-client
# 2. Print or install the interactive SKILL.md onboarding guide into the project:
python -m syntropy skill
python -m syntropy install-skill
# 3. Verify a claim from the terminal (auto-uses SYNTROPY_API_KEY, GEMINI_API_KEY, or OPENROUTER_API_KEY):
python -m syntropy verify "A distressed subsidiary may set off an unmatured shareholder loan 45 days before insolvency." \
--world "@law:insolvency-code" \
--axiom "Transfers or set-offs to related parties within 90 days prior to insolvency are voidable." \
--json
# 4. List official Small Worlds & inspect axioms:
python -m syntropy worlds
python -m syntropy axioms @pravo:obcansky-zakonik-cz
# 5. Run as a Model Context Protocol (MCP) stdio server:
python -m syntropy mcp
# Python SDK & Zero-Trust Agent Guardrail (@verify_agent_output):
from syntropy import SyntropyClient, verify_agent_output
client = SyntropyClient() # Defaults to https://api.synproof.ai
verdict = client.debate.verify(
thesis="Spotřebitel má právo odstoupit od smlouvy uzavřené v e-shopu do 14 dnů.",
world="@law:civil-code-obligations",
initial_axioms=["Spotřebitel má právo odstoupit od distanční smlouvy ve lhůtě 14 dnů (§ 1829 OZ)."],
max_failures=3,
)
print(verdict.is_confirmed, verdict.status, verdict.winning_thesis)
1. Theoretical Foundation: Why "Syntropy" vs. Information Entropy?
Standard generative AI models suffer from epistemic entropy: they are probabilistic token predictors trained to be agreeable, prone to hallucinating citations, forgetting user-supplied rules when those rules conflict with training weights, and drifting into logical contradiction over multi-step chains.
- Claude Shannon (Information Entropy, 1948): Measured uncertainty and disorder in communication channels ($H(X) = -\sum P(x)\log_2 P(x)$). Unchecked LLM generation increases informational entropy by mixing valid inferences with plausible-sounding confabulations.
- James Clerk Maxwell (Maxwell's Demon, 1867): Demonstrated that an intelligent sorting gate observing individual states can decrease local entropy by admitting valid states and rejecting invalid ones. Syntropy's 5-Sieve Tribunal acts as an epistemic Maxwell's Demon for reasoning.
- Luigi Fantappiè (1941) & Albert Szent-Györgyi (1974) — Syntropy (Negentropy): Defined syntropy as the symmetrical opposite of entropy: the tendency toward order, convergence, structure, and informational coherence. In Synproof's engine, Syntropy is the process of reducing epistemic entropy in a subsystem by pruning logically invalid or axiom-contradicting branches until only deductively sound truth remains.
- Karl Popper (Critical Rationalism & Falsification, 1934): A claim cannot be verified by flattering agreement; it earns epistemic standing only by surviving relentless, systematic attempts to refute it (Sceptical Exhaustion).
- Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (Calculemus), George Boole & Kurt Gödel: Translating natural-language disputes into formal propositional structures so deductive entailment can be calculated deterministically rather than guessed.
- Phan Minh Dung (Abstract Argumentation Frameworks, 1995): Evaluating the resulting directed graph of attacking and defending arguments bottom-up via Grounded Extension semantics (labeling nodes
IN,OUT, orREJECTED) to determine whether the original thesis survives on the hill.
2. How Syntropy Works: The 5-Stage Pipeline & 5 Formal Sieves
When you submit a thesis and a set of ground-truth axioms (or a Small World handle such as @law:civil-code-obligations), Syntropy executes five stages:
- 01. Formalize: Every argument generated by the Opponent (
CON) or Defender (PRO) must conform to a strict schema: explicitanalyzed_target, explicitlogical_premisebacked by citations/axioms, explicit deductivenew_thesis(conclusion), and symbolic propositional logic formulas (propositional_premisesandpropositional_conclusion). - 02. Anchor (Axiom Supremacy): Your Small World axioms are loaded as the 100% immutable Source of Truth (SoT). Proven in our Dogma Test: even if an axiom states a counterfactual rule that contradicts the LLM's pre-training, your axioms strictly override model prior beliefs.
- 03. Challenge (King of the Hill Adversarial Tree): The initial thesis starts as the King of the Hill (
ROOT). The Opponent (CON) has up tomax_failuresindependent attempts to synthesize a valid counter-argument that refutes the thesis. If an Opponent attack passes all 5 sieves ([CON] VALID), the thesis is placed in jeopardy and the Defender (PRO) is given up tomax_failuresattempts to refute that attack. If all Defender attempts fail ([PRO] REFUTED), the Opponent's counter-argument overthrows the original thesis and becomes the new King of the Hill (THESIS_DEFEATED). - 04. Validate (The 5 Formal Sieves):
- Sieve 0 — Vector Semantic Deduplication: Computes semantic embeddings of candidate premises against previously refuted attempts in the same scope to block circular repetition and rephrased dead ends.
- Sieve 1 — Epistemic Source Credibility Gate: Enforces allowed evidence tiers:
FORMAL_LOGICAL(Tier 100),PEER_REVIEWED_SCIENCE(Tier 85 — arXiv, PubMed, OpenAlex),EXACT_WORKS(Tier 75 — SymPy & formal math),OFFICIAL_INSTITUTIONAL(Tier 70 — statutes & standards),WIKIPEDIA(Tier 60 — Global English Wikipedia), andCOMMON_SENSE(Tier 20). Unverified assertions are rejected. - Sieve 2 — 100% All-Axiom Consistency & Entailment Filter: Retrieves all proximate axioms from the Small World and evaluates them individually and jointly ($A_1 \land A_2 \Rightarrow T$ or $\neg T$). Any candidate argument that contradicts any ground-truth axiom is immediately marked
REFUTEDwith the exact axiom and explanation. - Sieve 2.5 — Neuro-Symbolic SymPy Propositional SAT Solver: Verifies propositional formulas deterministically using SymPy satisfiability checking (Modus Ponens, Modus Tollens, Disjunctive Syllogism, De Morgan's laws) to catch formal non-sequiturs and self-contradictory premises.
- Sieve 3 — Deep Fallacy Firewall & Repair Loop: Detects and rejects Petitio Principii (circular reasoning), Strawman distortions, internal contradictions, formal Non-Sequiturs, and Scale / Reality Disconnect Fallacies (misusing a microscopic effect to deny macroscopic causality).
- 05. Rule (Deterministic Verdict & Audit Trail): Returns
CONFIRMED(viaSCEPTICAL_EXHAUSTIONwhen the opponent exhausts all attempts without finding a valid contradiction) orREFUTED(viaTHESIS_DEFEATEDwhen a valid counter-argument dethrones the thesis), complete with the winning counter-argument, triggered axioms, token telemetry, and full DAG node hierarchy.
3. Small Worlds Library & Axiomat Compiler
- Small Worlds (
My Worlds& Public Library): A Small World is a versioned, domain-specific collection of atomic ground-truth axioms (e.g.,@law:civil-code-obligations,@law:eu-gdpr-data-protection,@medicine:clinical-pharmacology-interactions,@physics:conservation-laws-thermo,@finance:basel-iii-aml-compliance,@cybersecurity:iso-27001-zero-trust). Users can create private Small Worlds, publish public Small Worlds to the Library, or fork existing worlds. - Axiomat Document-to-Axiom Compiler: Upload any PDF, DOCX, TXT, Markdown file, or raw regulatory/scientific text. Axiomat's 2-phase extraction and 6-point formal audit compiles unstructured documents into self-contained, atomic axioms, automatically deduplicating against existing axioms in your Small World and flagging any statutory or logical conflicts. Benchmarked on a 219-page book (67,000 words): 48 chunks processed in parallel into 1,294 audited axioms in under 2 minutes.
- Dialectical Playground &
My Results: Test any custom thesis against your uploaded Small Worlds (or custom inline axioms), inspect every dialectical branch and exact Sieve Rejection reason in the Node Hierarchy, tag results (e.g.,#law,#physics,#finance,#audit), and save verified verdicts to My Results mapped directly to the Small World and axioms used.
4. Verified Internal Benchmarks (550 / 550 = 100.0% Consistency)
- 550 / 550 (100.0%): Identical, ground-truth verdicts across 4 independent adversarial benchmark suites executed live through the full 5-sieve pipeline.
- 200 / 200 (100.0%): 20 Complex Interdisciplinary Micro-Worlds × 10 runs (153 formal axioms across corporate law, insolvency, banking BRRD, GDPR/AI Act, thermodynamics, quantum information, and formal ethics).
- 250 / 250 (100.0%): 50-run stress tests across Relativistic Physics, Quantum Information Theory, and 30-Axiom Statutory Law.
- 100 / 100 (100.0%): Counterfactual Dogma Test — proving that explicit user axioms strictly override pre-trained model beliefs 100% of the time.
5. Core Domains & Use Cases
- Science & Research (/science): Pre-submission peer review, hypothesis stress-testing against established literature (arXiv, OpenAlex, PubMed), and paradigm sandboxes.
- Law & Compliance (/law): Contract conflict auditing against statutes, litigation argument stress-testing, and regulatory compliance verification with zero hallucinated authority.
- Business & Finance (/business): Investment memo due diligence, M&A and ISDA/BRRD covenant checks, and strategy red-teaming against hard financial constraints.
- AI Governance & Agent Guardrails (/ai): Deterministic verification gate for autonomous AI agents and LLM pipelines before executing high-stakes actions.
- Public Policy & Regulation (/policy): Auditing draft legislation and institutional policies for internal contradictions and unintended statutory loopholes.
6. REST API Specification, Agent Skill & Token Pricing
Syntropy can be called from any application, Python workflow, or autonomous AI agent via POST https://api.synproof.ai/v1/debate or OpenAI-compatible POST https://api.synproof.ai/v1/chat/completions. Full machine-readable documentation for AI agents is available at https://synproof.ai/SKILL.md, https://synproof.ai/llms.txt, and https://synproof.ai/llms-full.txt.
POST https://api.synproof.ai/v1/debate
Headers:
Content-Type: application/json
X-API-Key: syn_mng_... (or AIza... / sk-or-v1-... for Zero-Friction BYOK)
Payload:
{
"thesis": "A distressed subsidiary may set off an unmatured shareholder loan 45 days before insolvency.",
"initial_axioms": [
"Transfers or set-offs to related parties within 90 days prior to insolvency are voidable.",
"Shareholder loans are statutorily subordinated during the 90-day twilight period."
],
"world": "@law:insolvency-code",
"max_failures": 3,
"enable_research": true,
"allowed_source_types": ["formal_logic", "peer_reviewed_science", "official_institutional"]
}
Transparent Token-Metered Pricing
- Managed Cloud Execution:
$0.80per 1M input tokens ·$8.00per 1M output tokens (a typical quick verification costs ~$0.02 USD; a 1,000+ axiom Small World verification costs ~$0.07 USD). - Bring Your Own Key (BYOK):
$0.20per 1M input tokens ·$1.50per 1M output tokens.