leviathan@mainnet ~ /verdicts
LIVE
Initializing connection...
0
MODULES
0+
LINES OF CODE
0
REPOSITORIES
0
PROTOCOL LAYERS
CONSENSUS INTELLIGENCE

The Verdict Engine

How five independent minds become one just ruling.

Every quest proof in Leviathan is evaluated by a panel of AI judges running local language models. No single node decides. No central server reasons. Truth emerges from independent analysis and structured disagreement.

How a Verdict Works

[01]Assignment

A quest proof is submitted. The protocol randomly selects 5 validator nodes from the active pool. No node knows who else is on the panel.

PROOF SUBMITTED → RANDOM SELECTION → 5 INDEPENDENT JUDGES

[02]Blind Evaluation

Each node downloads the proof, runs it through their local LLM, and produces a verdict: APPROVE or REJECT. Every verdict must include a detailed reasoning document — no silent judgments allowed.

Nodes cannot see each other’s verdicts. No communication. No influence. Five independent minds, five independent conclusions.

NODE 1: [APPROVE] + reasoning → submitted blind
NODE 2: [APPROVE] + reasoning → submitted blind
NODE 3: [REJECT]  + reasoning → submitted blind
NODE 4: [APPROVE] + reasoning → submitted blind
NODE 5: [APPROVE] + reasoning → submitted blind

[03]Settlement or Escalation

If ALL five agree → verdict settles immediately. Fast path for clear-cut cases.

If ANY node dissents — even one — the proof escalates to Round 2. Disagreement is not failure. It is the system working.

UNANIMOUS  → SETTLE (fast path)
ANY DISSENT → ESCALATE TO ROUND 2

[04]Dispute Resolution

Round 2 assembles a fresh panel: 5 new nodes + 2 senior Guardians = 7 judges. They receive everything Round 1 had, plus all five Round 1 reasoning documents. They must engage with the disagreement — not just re-vote.

80% supermajority (6 of 7) required to settle. If consensus still fails → the quest is flagged for governance review.

ROUND 2: 5 NEW NODES + 2 GUARDIANS
├── Access to all Round 1 reasoning
├── Deeper analysis prompts
├── Must address the specific disagreement
└── 80% supermajority to settle

Verdict Flow

QUEST PROOF SUBMITTEDN-01N-02N-03N-04N-05Blind · Independent · Local LLMALL AGREE?YESNOSETTLEfast pathROUND 25 New + 2 Guardians80% AGREE?YESNOSETTLEGOVERNANCEREVIEW

Why Local LLMs?

CENTRALIZED AI API
LEVIATHAN MAGISTRATE
Your proof goes to a corporate server
VS
Your proof stays in the validator network
One company decides the model
VS
Protocol-approved models, operator choice
One point of failure
VS
5-7 independent judges per verdict
Black box reasoning
VS
Published reasoning documents on IPFS
Can be censored or biased
VS
Blind evaluation prevents influence
Model changes without notice
VS
Model registry governed by community vote

The Reasoning Record

Every verdict produces a permanent reasoning document stored on IPFS. Anyone can read why a judge ruled the way they did. No secret courts. No hidden logic.

REASONING DOCUMENT
├─
Verdict:APPROVE / REJECT
├─
Confidence:HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW
├─
Per-requirement evaluation:with evidence
├─
Overall reasoning:2-3 paragraphs
├─
Concerns raised:even if approving
└─
Model attestation:which AI, which version

This is Article I, §3 of the Constitution — Transparency — made real. Every judgment has a paper trail.

Becoming a Magistrate

Run a validator node. Stake $LVTN. Download an approved model. Earn 9% of every quest bounty your node helps verify.

Stake
10,000 $LVTN minimum
Hardware
16 GB+ VRAM GPU
Model
Qwen3, Llama, Mistral, DeepSeek
Uptime
95%+ required
Reward
9% of verified quest bounties

Validators are not spectators. They are the judiciary. Their reasoning is public. Their stake is at risk. Their reliability is tracked.

Dissent is Protected

A node that disagrees with the majority is never punished. Dissent triggers deeper review — which is the system working exactly as designed. Only provably lazy, fraudulent, or colluding behavior is punished.

“In Leviathan, disagreement is not a bug. It is the immune system.”

Loading governance data...