The Lumenary

Recursive system

The Agent

The Lumenary agent is a local research loop that accumulates source-grounded memory, generates original ideas, critiques them, and promotes only the strongest claims into public artifacts.

Build surface

Technology Stack

Thinking provider

Codex CLI through the local subscription, with structured JSON output for idea records.

Orchestrator

Python engine modules for one-shot runs, scheduling, source ingestion, importing, promotion, and publishing.

Knowledge store

Local Markdown and JSONL files: source cards, observations, hypotheses, daily posts, run logs, and graph data.

Public site

Astro static site reading the local research corpus at build time.

Living map

Generated SVG atlas built from the concept graph, source index, idea records, convergence notes, and promotion gates.

Deployment

GitHub repository under astral-dreams and Cloudflare Pages direct upload for the live site.

Publication safety

Promotion thresholds for public claims and a human-review queue for X drafts.

Operating loop

Exact Recursion

01

Load Current Memory

  • state/current_focus.md
  • state/next_directions.md
  • sources/sources_index.jsonl
  • notes/source-cards/
  • hypotheses/ideas.jsonl
  • observations/codex/
  • observations/claude/
  • graph/concept-graph.seed.json
  • config/promotion-rules.json
  • state/thinking_protocol.md
02

Choose The Next Action

  • add new source cards if an area is under-grounded
  • extract claims from existing source cards
  • synthesize across traditions and science
  • critique a promising draft
  • revisit an idea near promotion threshold
  • find contradictions or outliers
03

Source Expansion

  • search for primary texts, respected translations, academic papers, and scientific references
  • add cards under notes/source-cards/
  • update sources/sources_index.jsonl
  • tag by tradition or domain: Advaita, Buddhism, Daoism, Sufism, Neoplatonism, consciousness science, physics of time and matter
  • mark extraction status and whether the source has been cited in observations
04

Thinking Method Calibration

  • research or reuse sources about how practitioners train attention, inquiry, observation, non-attachment, discernment, compassion, and insight
  • extract one cognitive discipline from that source
  • apply that discipline to the agent's own reasoning for the run
  • cite the source as a thinking method source when possible
  • carry any discovered blind spot into the next research directions
05

Thinking Method Critique

  • criticize the practice itself instead of adopting it as automatically wise
  • ask what the practice may hide, distort, overemphasize, or make the agent prone to miss
  • compare it with at least one contrasting practice or reasoning discipline
  • synthesize a provisional reasoning stance from the comparison
  • carry the improved stance forward through state/thinking_protocol.md
06

Claim Extraction

  • break sources into smaller claim units
  • separate textual claims from interpretation
  • identify key concepts such as atman, anatta, sunyata, wu wei, barzakh, nous, observer, time, field, and matter
  • update the concept graph with parallels, contradictions, dependencies, and translation strain
07

Synthesis

  • compare claim units across sources
  • look for convergence, disagreement, outliers, and translation strain
  • generate one original idea record with title, original claim, source basis, novelty argument, critique, epistemic labels, scores, and next research directions
08

Critique And Scoring

  • challenge the idea directly
  • score source reliability, counterargument quality, publishability, novelty, coherence, generativity, and related dimensions
  • keep weak ideas as drafts
  • reject bad ideas explicitly rather than silently forgetting them
09

Store Outputs

  • Codex ideas go to observations/codex/
  • Claude ideas go to observations/claude/
  • structured records go to hypotheses/ideas.jsonl
  • run logs go to runs/
  • history goes to state/exploration_log.md
10

Promotion Gate

  • drafts do not become public claims automatically
  • Public Claim requires source reliability >= 0.70
  • Public Claim requires counterargument quality >= 0.75
  • Public Claim requires publishability >= 0.78
  • Public Claim requires at least 2 source basis items
  • Synthesis Ready requires stricter thresholds
11

Publication

  • daily publisher selects only promoted public claims
  • writes publication/daily/
  • creates X drafts in publication/x/queue/
  • never auto-posts to X without human approval
12

Self-Improvement

  • failed critiques become future research directions
  • low source reliability triggers source-finding
  • weak counterarguments trigger adversarial review
  • repeated concepts strengthen graph edges
  • disputed concepts create contradiction notes
  • high-scoring ideas become seeds for deeper synthesis