cybergraph specs

cybergraph is exactly its structure, nothing more and nothing less:

cybergraph  ←  signals  ←  cyberlinks

a cybergraph is built from signals; a signal is built from cyberlinks; each has a fixed, finite set of fields. these specs define those fields — one article per field — plus the two emergents that appear when you read or group the structure (axon, attention) and the query interface that reads it. deep mechanics of a field live in the repo that owns them (zheng proof construction, tru focus/impulse, tok tokens / plumb value ops, mudra identity, sync ordering); cybergraph defines the field and references them.

the structure

• cybergraph.md — the triple $(P, N, L)$, six axioms, derived adjacency
• signal.md — the broadcast unit a neuron commits
• cyberlink.md — the atomic unit a signal carries
• intent.md — an unsealed signal: declared and identity-proven, not yet sealed

signal fields

$$s = (\nu,\; \mathit{net},\; \vec\ell,\; \Delta\phi^*,\; \sigma,\; h_0,\; h_1)$$

cyberlink — link + box + valence

the five stored fields group into three concepts: a link (the edge), a box (the conviction), a valence (the prediction).

$$\text{cyberlink} \;=\; \text{link}(from,\,to) \;+\; \text{box}(coin,\,amount) \;+\; valence$$

emergents — what appears when you read or group the structure

• axon.md — the bundle of all cyberlinks between two particles (groups links; homoiconic, axiom A6)
• attention.md — the focus a neuron projects onto a target (a read; query(from, to)). complete form in tru

process — what cybergraph does (mechanism)

the structure above is what cybergraph is; these four verbs are what it does. each is a static handoff to one companion — deterministic mechanism, no decisions.

validate→order→apply is the write path (inside link/seal); expose is the read (query).

the seal binding — promise to proof

a signal's life is a promise then a proof: intent.md intend(scope) commits a signed scope; the neuron runs it (nox) and proves it (zheng); seal commits the result. the commit gate enforces one rule — seal(i, s) accepted iff σ(s) ⊢ scope_hash(i). that binding makes intent and signal one transaction, and is the alignment property at the commit port. see intent.md ## completion.

what cybergraph does NOT do — orchestration is soma's

cybergraph and soma are one processor: cybergraph is the dumb half (store · events · commit-gate), soma the smart half (the runtime). the decision loop — read an intent, collect recomputed state from bbg, run it through nox, judge what is left to compute, iterate, and only then emit a signal — is dynamic control, not a static pipeline. it falls out, upward, to soma. soma calls cybergraph's four verbs and drives the fetch→execute→prove→commit cycle; it is not one of the verbs. cybergraph is fast, correct, stateless; soma is the mind that drives it. see the whitepaper.

staking — placing weight

• staking.md — the two write paths that produce attention: will (broad, → tru) and conviction (per-link box)

query

• query.md — the relations cybergraph exposes to inf. schema only; the language lives in inf/README