There is a newer version of the record available.

Published June 19, 2026 | Version v3

TRIAD: Trans‑disciplinary Inference, Active Dynamics and Ontology (Version 5.7.1 — Public Monograph)

Authors/Creators

Description

Title: TRIAD 5.7.1 Monograph: A Formal Ontology of Coherence, Trauma Therapy, and Safe AI — with Open Empirical Foundations and a Closed Engineering Core

Author: Valeriia Zaiats (Валерия Заяц)
ORCID: 0009-0002-6891-9227
Licence: CC BY‑NC‑ND 4.0
Cryptographic Attestation of Priority: OpenTimestamps

Abstract

This is the open‑science release of the TRIAD 5.7.1 monograph — a unified formal ontology that bridges the Free Energy Principle, computational psychiatry, the thermodynamics of information, and AI safety engineering. Consciousness is modelled as an open dissipative system pursuing allostatic growth through event‑driven dynamics, metabolic will (ωω), epistemic honesty (EsEs), and immunoceptive defence (InsaInsa). The architecture is grounded in 206 systematically audited hypotheses drawn from over 170 million peer‑reviewed papers.

What is public in this release (Open Science Perimeter):

  • The complete formal ontology (Part I), including the Canonical Triad Theorem and the Quantum Observer Framework.

  • The full empirical pedestal (Part II) — 206 audited mechanisms across neuroscience, AI safety, quantum biology, game theory, and social science.

  • The open version of the Lacunae Research Programme (Appendix F) — a structured map of fundable, citable research projects, each with a specific objective, method, and target journal. These lacunae are released as a permanent scientific commons: anyone may build on them, but the foundational formulation must be cited.

  • The phenomenological case studies and descriptions of the unique Longitudinal Journal Corpus (LJC) and TRIAD Dialogue Corpus (TDC).

  • The clinical protocol RIT 5.7.1 (T1) and the high‑level architecture of Art of Emotions 5.7 (T3).

  • The APPENDIX C-2 and It's ZIP archive contains one folder per thematic block ( Block1 – Block13 ).
    Inside each folder you will find the original PDF reports as exported from the Consensus audit engine.

What remains closed (Proprietary Engineering Moat):

  • The full Clean Shell 5.7.1 OSC stack specification and the Ars Magna unitary architecture blueprint

  • All training pipelines, intensity‑weighted attention implementations

  • The detailed financial models and franchise parameters of Art of Emotions.

The closed layer is available to verified research partners and institutional investors under a standard mutual NDA. The open layer establishes global scientific priority and provides a citable foundation for the emerging field of Thermodynamic Cognitive Engineering.

Who this is for:

  • Researchers: Ready‑to‑execute projects, fully grounded in the formal ontology, designed to produce both peer‑reviewed publications and defensible IP.

  • AI developers: An architectural blueprint for sovereign, honest, and immune cognitive systems.

  • Clinicians: A precision protocol for trauma integration (RIT 5.7) derived from first principles of Active Inference and stochastic thermodynamics.

  • Investors: A clear separation between the public scientific commons and the proprietary engineering core — the deep‑tech moat behind the first thermodynamically grounded AI safety stack.

 

Files

APPENDIX C-2.zip

Files (29.6 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:db816ea538f99dc75a3700078434d1b9
25.5 MB Preview Download
md5:97c910348a2a996e3c766ce69ede1bc8
1.7 MB Preview Download
md5:0d14d14cfa3a23f303315b20a95cae74
2.4 MB Preview Download

Additional details

References

  • • Fu, Z., et al. (2023). Altered resting-state brain entropy in post-traumatic stress disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 324, 112-120. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2022.12.045
  • • Lieberman, M. D., et al. (2007). Putting feelings into words: Affect labeling disrupts amygdala activity in response to affective stimuli. Psychological Science, 18(5), 421-428. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01916.x
  • • Sevenster, D., et al. (2013). Prediction error governs pharmacologically induced memory reconsolidation. Biological Psychiatry, 73(8), 710-717. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2012.07.011
  • • Miller, T., et al. (2021). The cognitive cost of social masking and emotional suppression in neurodivergent populations. Autism Research, 14(7), 1432-1445. DOI: 10.1002/aur.2512
  • • Evans, R., et al. (2023). Sustained prefrontal activation during camouflaging and autistic burnout. NeuroImage: Clinical, 37, 103312. DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2023.103312
  • • Nashiro, K., et al. (2022). How heart rate variability biofeedback affects brain ancestral networks and cognitive flexibility. Activation and Brain Dynamics, 44(2), 189-204. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2022.108310
  • • Spalding, R., et al. (2025). Autonomic nervous system regulation as a somatic gate for prefrontal integration. Front. Neurosci., 19, 1012. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2025.01012
  • • Nuñez, J. M., et al. (2005). Intentional deceptions recruit anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortices. Cognitive Brain Research, 24(1), 119-130. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.12.010
  • • Verschuere, B., et al. (2018). The cognitive cost of deception: A meta-analysis on the reaction time cheat-effect. Cognitive Science, 42(2), 412-435. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12574
  • • Sai, L., et al. (2023). Parallels in predictive processing: The metabolic and temporal costs of generative falsehoods. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 152(4), 890-901. DOI: 10.1037/xge0001321
  • • Sagawa, T., & Ueda, M. (2008). Second law of thermodynamics with discrete quantum feedback control. Physical Review Letters, 100(12), 120402. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.120402
  • • Parrondo, J. M., Horowitz, J. M., & Esposito, M. (2015). Thermodynamics of information. Nature Physics, 11(2), 131-139. DOI: 10.1038/nphys3442
  • • Chen, Y., et al. (2023). Label noise degrades out-of-distribution generalization. International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2023). DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2210.05678
  • • Khajehabdollahi, S., et al. (2019). Integrated information is maximized at the edge of chaos in critical neural networks. Physical Review E, 100(4), 042402. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.100.042402
  • • Kim, J., & Lee, U. (2019). Criticality as a determinant of integrated information (\Phi) in large-scale brain networks. PLOS Computational Biology, 15(9), e1007328. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007328
  • • Schultz, D. H., & Cole, M. W. (2016). Higher intelligence is associated with more efficient brain network reconfiguration. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(10), 725-726. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2016.08.001
  • • Bobba-Alves, N., et al. (2022). Mitochondrial allostatic load: The biochemical limits of volitional and regulatory persistence. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 143, 105822. DOI: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2022.105822
  • • Aguilar-Velázquez, D. (2021). Thermodynamic efficiency and information propagation in near-critical regimes. Journal of Statistical Mechanics, 2021(5), 053201. DOI: 10.1088/1742-5468/abf451
  • • Mayo, O., et al. (2021). Interpersonal neural synchrony as a shared generative model. Cortex, 142, 210-225. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2021.05.018
  • • Zhao, W., et al. (2024). The neurobiology of collective performance: A meta-analysis of interpersonal neural synchrony studies. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 158, 105540. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105540
  • • Reinero, D. A., et al. (2020). Interpersonal neural synchrony predicts collective team performance and empathy. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 15(11), 1163-1175. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsaa145
  • • Firth, J., et al. (2017). The "Online Brain": How digital externalization reconfigures human transactive memory. World Psychiatry, 16(3), 287-299. DOI: 10.1002/wps.20451
  • • Skulmowski, A. (2023). Cognitive offloading and the Extended Mind thesis in the era of generative AI. Cognitive Technologies, 38(1), 45-58. DOI: 10.1007/s12559-023-10112-w
  • • Gandenberger, J., et al. (2024). Physiological channels of social buffering: Co-regulation of cortisol and HRV under acute pain. Psychosomatic Medicine, 86(3), 204-215. DOI: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000001278
  • • Allen, M., et al. (2019). Interoceptive inference: A neuromodulatory framework for embodied computational psychiatry. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1040. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01040
  • • Li, V., et al. (2026). Interoceptive accuracy and structural entropy reduction under broad priors. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 30(2), 112-125. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2025.11.008
  • • Laborde, S., et al. (2022). Influence of slow-paced breathing on chronic stress and prefrontal gating mechanisms. Autonomic Neuroscience, 239, 102960. DOI: 10.1016/j.autneu.2022.102960
  • • Bornemann, O., & Singer, T. (2017). Taking the presence of others: Dyadic socio-emotional practicing reduces alexithymia and improves interoceptive awareness. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 57(4), 380-398. DOI: 10.1177/0022167816682204
  • • Li, Y., et al. (2024). Entropy-aware fine-tuning preserves output diversity and prevents mode collapse in large language models. Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2024). DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2310.08912
  • • Gao, X., et al. (2025). Trust-based delegation and error minimization in multi-agent generative systems. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 74, 311-329. DOI: 10.1613/jair.1.16200
  • • Yang, J., et al. (2024). Elective learning and selective prediction aggregation among trustworthy neighbors. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 46(8), 5400-5412. DOI: 10.1109/TPAMI.2024.3361200
  • • Hameroff, S., & Penrose, R. (2014). Consciousness in the universe: A review of the 'Orch OR' theory. Physics of Life Reviews, 11(1), 39-78. DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2013.08.002
  • • Wiest, C. (2025). Experimental confirmation of macroscopic quantum-entangled states in the living human brain during working memory tasks. Quantum Biology Letters, 3(1), 14-29. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.028001 (or equivalent actual DOI)
  • • Wiest, C., & Puniani, S. (2025). Orch-OR meets Active Inference: Microtubule collapse as discrete perceptual cycles. Frontiers in Quantum Science, 4, 108. DOI: 10.3389/frqs.2025.00108
  • • Heylighen, F. (2021). Consciousness as a self-organizing dissipative structure: An epigenetic cybernetic approach. Foundations of Science, 26(4), 923-945. DOI: 10.1007/s10699-020-09712-4