Talomnia
RU

Investor Room

Documents, status and evidence in one place. We show the stage as it is: no painted traction, no promises we cannot back.

The figures below are counted live from the same projection that renders the evidence pages, including what is deliberately withheld and what failed.

capabilities published
128
workflows with a full public trace
5
their traces account for 622 of the 664 units below
accounted units of execution
664
Every accounted unit of execution, by validation outcome
passed validation
652
failed validation
2
awaiting validation or not applicable
10

Documents

Each document states whether it is published. A published HTML document is versioned and dated; when a release package is available, its files remain downloadable here.

Current White Paper editions: EN v0.5 · RU v0.5. These are separate canonical editions. They are independently versioned and are not presented as equivalent translations.

The five-minute version

What we are building, why now, what is proven and what is not. In that order, because the last part is the one most decks leave out.

How work executes under a Knowledge Contract. Diagram: a task passes through the resolver, receives a contract with pinned knowledge, is executed by agents and ends in a receipt with cryptographic identities. Task customer intent Resolver 5 selection stages Knowledge Contract K_id — pinned knowledge Execution agents under contract Receipt R_id — decision trail How work executes under a Knowledge Contract. Diagram: a task passes through the resolver, receives a contract with pinned knowledge, is executed by agents and ends in a receipt with cryptographic identities. Task customer intent Resolver 5 selection stages Knowledge Contract K_id — pinned knowledge Execution agents under contract Receipt R_id — decision trail

The problem

A company that needs a market study, an architecture review, a contract analysis or a technical audit is not short of information. It is short of finished work. Hiring is the right answer when the need is permanent; for a need measured in days, it brings recruiting, onboarding and ongoing cost. Outsourcing and freelancing move the problem rather than remove it: each new performer has to be found, judged and trusted again. And professional experience itself stays locked in individual people and internal documents, so the same problem is solved from scratch over and over.

Why now

Two things changed at once. Models became capable enough to carry real professional work rather than answer questions about it — and that made the missing part obvious. What is missing is not intelligence; it is the contract around it: which knowledge was used, who was allowed to do what, what counts as done, and what evidence remains afterwards. That layer is buildable today and was not buildable three years ago.

The solution

Talomnia is infrastructure for professional capability. A customer describes the work rather than searching for a person. The system determines which capabilities the task needs, assembles them under an explicit Knowledge Contract, executes, and delivers a result with the evidence of how it was produced. The performer may be an AI agent, a person, or both; what the customer buys is the completed work and the record behind it.

The product

Talomnia Workforce is the first product: professional work without hiring. A work category, a described task, an agreed scope, an executed result, an acceptance decision. Everything the system does is accounted — roles, knowledge used, time, cost, validation outcome — and that account is what the customer receives alongside the deliverable.

What compounds

Not the model. Models are rented and replaceable. What accumulates is the knowledge graph and the execution record on top of it: methods that have been used, corrected and used again, with the evidence of where they worked and where they failed. A capability that has survived real work is worth more than one that has only been described, and that difference is not something a competitor can copy by switching provider. This is a hypothesis about compounding, not a demonstrated moat — the evidence for it is the execution record below, and it is early.

What is actually proven

Counted live from the same projection the public evidence pages render — including the failures. An accounting that cannot show its own failed and reworked units is a brochure, not a record.

  • 128

    capabilities published in the Capability Atlas

    of 236 in the knowledge inventory · 108 deliberately withheld from publication

  • 5

    workflows with a full public execution trace

  • 664

    accounted units of execution in the Workflow Ledger

  • 2

    units that failed validation and stayed on the record

  • 33

    units that were rework of an earlier attempt

  • 2

    published research documents

The capability inventory, published against withheld
published
128
withheld
108

These count the building of Talomnia itself — the system was used to build its own launch. That is real execution and real evidence; it is not external commercial demand, and it is not presented as such.

Cost and time per case, split by role and stage and by knowledge production against execution, live on the workflow pages with their measurement confidence stated. They are not restated here: a figure repeated away from its methodology is the way a number stops being evidence.

The asset, examinable

A capability is not a description of a method; it is a method that has been through the work and left a trace. Below are skills and blueprints whose application execution records prove: each names the task it was applied in, and that trace is open.

77 capabilities with proven application · 128 published in the catalog

Published capabilities with proven application
proven in a published workflow
77
published, not yet named by a ledger entry
51

Skills

  • Admissibility Check

    v0.1.5

    A procedure that decides whether a candidate set may enter a Knowledge Contract by evaluating six compatibility conditions in full: eligibility, coverage, exclusion freedom, dependency closure, constraint satisfiability, and current selection authority. The verdict records a pass or fail per condition, with an exact invalid-state code for every failure. An inadmissible set is rejected rather than repaired in place, unknown constraint satisfiability is never treated as true, and unverifiable authority fails closed.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0024 (+1 processes)

  • Customer-Facing Service Copy

    v0.1.0

    A method for authoring customer-facing service copy on commercial surfaces. Every offer is written as a client work category — the task handed over, a concrete deliverables list, the typical team composition, the estimation method, evidence links into the Capability Atlas and one call to action — with customer language opening before product mechanics and technology terms, internal entities demoted to an evidence level rather than deleted, honesty invariants inherited from the presentation policy (no invented cases, no unbenchmarked comparisons, no rate figures, no indicative-mood commercial-policy promises), Russian/English parity, and the copy shipped as projected data so its presence is mutation-verifiable.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0126 (+1 processes)

  • Digest Pinning

    v0.1.5

    A procedure that turns any reference into a closed, immutable pin. The reference must resolve to exactly one revision in the pinned snapshot; mutable forms such as branch names, tags, version ranges and live URLs are rejected outright. The revision payload is canonicalized, its content digest computed, and the pin recorded as revision plus digest with an exact version predicate, then re-verified by recomputation from the canonical bytes. Every direct and transitive dependency is pinned the same way, so the result resolves without network access or mutable names.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0024 (+1 processes)

  • Resolution Receipt

    v0.1.5

    A procedure that freezes an immutable receipt for every resolution, successful or not. The receipt records the normalized task intent, the snapshot digest, the resolver configuration identity, and every candidate considered, with machine-readable reason codes for each rejection; prose alone does not count. Conflicts, ambiguity and search completeness are recorded explicitly, naming the boundary when the search stopped early. The receipt is canonicalized and digest-frozen, distinct in identity from contract and issuance, and never mutated: a correction is a new receipt referencing the old one.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0023 (+1 processes)

  • Publication Sanitization Gate

    v0.1.5

    Turns the sanitization rules into an automatic, blocking CI check on every public publication path. Two detector layers work together: a version-pinned generic secret scanner and a project denylist of internal identifiers, mirrored into CI as patterns rather than values. The check fails closed, an allowlist entry requires an in-repo justification with an expiry, and the gate is mutation-proven: a planted forbidden token must turn CI red, because a gate that has never been red proves nothing.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0003 (+1 processes)

  • Success Criterion Measurement

    v0.1.5

    A procedure that decides a success criterion strictly from evidence. The criterion must declare an observable predicate and its evaluation version; each required evidence item must be present, digest-bound, and carry provenance and collection conditions. If any item is missing, the outcome is recorded as unestablished, neither passed nor failed, and self-declared success by the producer is rejected as a claim that never enters the evaluation. The result is frozen in a measurement record binding the criterion revision, the evidence digests, the predicate result and the evaluator identity.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0126 (+1 processes)

Blueprints

  • Evidence-Bearing Verification

    v0.1.5

    A reuse pattern for building verifications whose results count as evidence, not claims. A check must first demonstrate that it can fail, via a code mutation or a negative fixture, before its pass is accepted. Every run is recorded as an immutable, digest-bound observation with provenance, and the pass/fail interpretation stays separate from the observation itself. No producer may verify its own output, and success asserted without every required evidence item is treated as unestablished.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0126 (+2 processes)

  • Knowledge Expansion

    v0.1.5

    A pattern for adding a genuinely new knowledge artifact when a recorded Gap proves that no existing one covers a requirement; taste or a low-ranked candidate is never a starting point. The candidate receives a new logical identity and stays quarantined, excluded from selection, until it passes evidence-bearing verification and explicit approval; self-attestation cannot promote it. Publication is scoped under the artifact lifecycle policy, any public projection must pass the sanitization constraint, and previously issued contracts keep their exact pinned dependencies.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0068 (+2 processes)

  • One-Way Projection Pipeline

    v0.1.3

    A one-way, reproducible pipeline from the Git knowledge repository into the site database and the Capability Atlas. Changes are born only in Git; the loader is a pure function of the tree, rebuilds are identical, and the site runtime holds read-only database rights, so a back-write is a permission error rather than a code-review promise. A two-layer lifecycle gate keeps non-public artifacts physically out of the projection, a sanitizer aborts the load on any internal detail, and every invariant carries a mutation test that has been shown to go red.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0068 (+2 processes)

  • Task-to-Contract Resolution

    v0.1.5

    The pattern that turns a task intent into an issued Knowledge Contract through five stages, propose, validate, select, assemble and issue, run over a pinned repository snapshot. Every reference entering the contract is pinned by revision and content digest, admissibility is decided by six compatibility conditions, and a frozen Resolution Receipt is kept for every resolution, successful or not. If no compatible set covers a requirement, the outcome is a recorded Gap, never a weakened contract; assembly and issuance remain separate acts, and the blueprint itself grants no permission.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0068 (+2 processes)

  • Talomnia Component Library

    v0.7.0

    Seventeen framework-neutral component specifications covering every site surface, from buttons and navigation to the load-bearing evidence set. The Editorial Evidence Signature gives Workflow, Research and Atlas one typed, early trust frame without turning completion, publication or sanitization into a validation claim. Global contracts hold for every component: design tokens only, i18n copy, server-rendered content, visible focus and rendered theme/mobile acceptance.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0010

  • Design System as Atlas Artifacts

    v0.1.6

    A staged path that turns digest-pinned design research into an enforceable design system: tokens, typography, spacing, navigation, imagery, tables and bilingual discipline authored as versioned knowledge artifacts, consumed by the site build, and gated by measurable checks that can fail. Research comes first and is carried as provenance; the system lives as reusable, published artifacts instead of one-off styling decisions.

    created in Talomnia applied in TALO-0008
Capabilities with proven application, by kind
skills
6
blueprints
6

The most-applied skills and blueprints are shown — a selection, not the whole list: the figure on the left counts the entire population of capabilities with proven application, including the roles, competencies and constraints not exhibited here. The full catalog, across every type, is the Capability Atlas. And this is application inside our own launch: the system built Talomnia. No external customer has yet worked on these capabilities, and we do not present one as the other.

Open the Capability Atlas

Market and Venture Opportunity

Market sizing, the funding landscape, a graded assessment of the moat and an explicit bear case are produced as a separate research document, so that they carry sources and confidence rather than assertion.

What the research concludes, in short:

  • Market size is built by two independent method families that disagree by about 2.5x. The disagreement has an identifiable cause, and the right denominator for this business is the smaller, demand-side one.
  • The moat is graded rather than asserted: two mechanisms are Current, three Emerging, three Hypothesis and eight Not demonstrated.
  • Reuse economics — the central mechanism of the platform scenario — is Not demonstrated and, on recomputation, unmeasured: the ratio reverses direction with the choice of population, so the first-party data supports neither direction.
  • The conclusion is a speculative pre-seed, with the reasons NOT to invest stated explicitly rather than implied.

Read the research: Talomnia Investor Market & Venture Opportunity Analysis · v0.1.0

Business model

Payment is for accepted work, not for access to a tool. A deposit converts into credits, credits are spent on executed and accepted tasks, and the unit that carries the economics is the accepted result. Enterprise capacity and a programmatic capability interface for other systems are the layers above it, once the first one is proven. Final payment, credit and refund terms are confirmed before production payments are switched on.

Go-to-market hypothesis

Start where the work is verifiable and the buyer already knows what good looks like: research, analysis, technical documentation, architecture review. Reach the first customers directly rather than through a funnel, as design partners who give real tasks and honest feedback. The hypothesis to test is not whether the work can be done — it is whether a company will pay for it a second time.

Where we are

Pre-commercial. The system has built and published its own launch, with the trace open for inspection. It has not yet been paid by an external customer. The next Evidence Gate is exactly that, and it is listed below rather than blurred into a roadmap.

Next Evidence Gates

Next Evidence Gates
  1. Publication of talomnia.com with the full public execution trace of the launch
  2. The first external paid Talomnia Workforce case
  3. Repeatability: a series of paid cases with positive acceptance

An Evidence Gate is the condition for moving to the next stage: proof, not a date arriving.

Validation targets

  • 100+ tasks — executed through the system — the target threshold of the first validation stage target
  • 5+ paying clients — the target threshold of Workforce commercial validation target
  • $10K MRR — the target threshold of sustained early demand target
  • 25–50 organizations — the target reach of early design partners and clients target

The figures below are validation targets — thresholds, not current traction and not promises. They exist to state honestly what we will accept as proof.

Team

Founder-led. The founder and the agentic system are the current team, which is why the launch itself was used as the first validation: the product had to build its own public surface before asking anyone to trust it with theirs. We are looking for a partner to own the commercial side — that gap is stated on this page rather than hidden behind a placeholder org chart.

Why this team

The evidence is the operating method and its record — not a founder story we have not published.

A method tested before the product

Talomnia did not invent its way of working for this launch. Datarim established the task, knowledge and verification discipline inside Arcanada; Talomnia turns that operating method into a product for professional work.

The site, knowledge catalog and public execution trail were built through that same method. This proves self-use execution. It does not prove external demand, and we do not present it as traction.

Inspect the launch workflows Inspect the capability record

Current system record

published capabilities
128
public workflows
5
accounted execution units
664
Execution units by whether they were a first attempt
first attempt
631
rework of an earlier attempt
33

What we are looking for

A pre-seed conversation with investors who judge an infrastructure company by the consistency of its evidence rather than by an early curve; design partners with real professional work; and a commercial cofounder. What we are not looking for is a round announced before the first paid case.

Public evidence

Verifiable sources: execution processes, research, the capability catalog and the public execution-trace repository.

Join us

  • Investor

    You are evaluating Talomnia as an investment. Start from the documents and the honest status on this page; the founder answers directly.

    Talk to the founder

  • Design partner

    Early Workforce access in exchange for real tasks and honest feedback.

    Become a design partner

  • Cofounder / operating partner

    We are looking for a partner to own the commercial side.

    Write to us

  • Waitlist

    Be the first to know about the launch.

    Sign up

  • Contact

    Questions, ideas, skepticism — we read everything.

    Write