Perslis

Drag to turn it. Scroll to walk through it.

PERSLIS · THE BRAIN FACTORY

Perslis builds brains.

Small. Explicit. Inspectable. Adaptive. Portable.

We began with a small problem: could a child’s toy have a useful brain of its own, offline? Solving it forced us to work out how intelligence is compressed, represented, moved, inspected — and finally changed by experience. Scroll, and watch the brain assemble in the order we built it.

00Day 1

The brain factory

Can a child's toy have its own small, offline brain?

Intelligence that lives inside the product — not rented from a cloud for as long as the product exists. Big models as teachers and tools, never as the permanent brain.

01Feb–Mar 2026

TinkyBrains

Small, specialised brains

The first body was a communication app for children who cannot rely on speech (AAC). Its brain was a store of conversation trees, running offline on cheap tablets.

On the record Peel began with augmentative and alternative communication.

02Mar–May 2026

SML — the smallest language model

Teacher → verifier → student

A large teacher writes candidate data; a verifier admits it; a small student is trained from scratch only on what was admitted. It is not distillation: nothing reaches the student that the verifier did not admit.

On the record TinkyBrain v6: 25.5 million parameters, 24 MB, about 2.9 s per answer on a 2017 Kindle Fire.

03Mar 2026 →

Structured knowledge

Knowledge stops being trapped inside weights

A typed store of records and relations: every answer is a row you can read, cite and delete. The model is demoted to generator or renderer; the store is the only author of facts.

On the record About 372,764 structured records. Conditioning on the structure raised answer diversity from 0.589 to 0.966 with the same model.

04Mar 2026 →

Trace — Peel

The system remembers what happened, and why

Every fact carries where it came from. Decisions become inspectable state transitions with provenance, instead of output that is gone once it is read.

On the record Every fact is traceable to the source it was extracted from.

05Sep 2026

Fail-First

Failure becomes the mechanism that changes the brain

Observed failure → evidence → hypothesis → a candidate change → a controlled test → reject, not proven, or promote — inside an authority the learner cannot widen.

On the record 4,280 cards became 30 rules and 203 chained evidence tiles. Space Invaders +32%; Freeway −12%, published.

06Sep 2026

Peel — a self-evolving symbolic brain

It changes while it runs, without gradient descent

Operational knowledge changes between attempts while the system is running: an evolver proposes, a doctor diagnoses, pruning removes — each only with proof. No neural weight is updated.

On the record Doom: 37 changes proposed, 1 promoted. BattleZone: pruning with proof, +66% over the native rules.

07Sep 2026

One brain, many worlds

Stop building a new brain for every environment

The same architecture runs Doom, GoldenEye, Fallout, tanks, a drone course, photoreal driving and legacy software — and a brain trained in one game can be sealed, moved and run in another.

On the record A tank brain trained in BZFlag scored 17% above BattleZone's native rules over 80 seeds.

08Next

The embodied brain

The world stops being software

Hardware in the loop, low-cost physical platforms, a humanoid testbed, then sanctioned robot-vs-robot competition — each gated behind the one before.

On the record The robot we plan to put in a ring is a descendant of the toy brain.

The embodied experiment →

Back to the first idea, at a different scale.

That work became SML. SML led to explicit knowledge structures. Those structures led to Trace. Trace made failure observable. Failure led to Fail-First. Fail-First led to Peel. And Peel brought us back to where we started: a factory for brains.

THE SAME QUESTION, FIVE TIMES

We started by shrinking models. We ended up asking whether everything needed to be a model.

  1. How do we make intelligence small enough to live offline?
  2. What if knowledge does not have to live only in weights?
  3. What if experience itself can stay explicit?
  4. What if the system can change that explicit knowledge from evidence while it runs?
  5. What if the part that adapts is not a neural model at all?
WHERE A NEURAL MODEL FITS

Adaptive computation without weight updates.

  1. Neural modelperception · language · ambiguity
  2. Peelexplicit state · relationships · hypotheses · learned rules
  3. Floorauthority · invariants · execution
  4. Worlda game · a legacy system · a machine

A neural model can have billions of weights. Peel does not need to change them to learn something new: its persistent learned state is explicit — rows you can read, cite and delete — and the floor bounds what any of it may do.

Learning without weight updates is not new: symbolic learning, inductive logic programming, program synthesis, evolutionary methods and shielding all do it. What we claim is narrower — this architecture, the method that produced it, and the evidence behind every change it makes. The Fail-First Model and its prior art →

WHY THIS IS ONE COMPANY

Not seventeen technologies. One question: how do you build intelligence you actually own?

Doom is not the company. The fighting robot is not the company. The children’s communication app is not the company. They are bodies and worlds a Perslis brain has been placed in.

The brain, region by region, and the proof, game by game →

Talk to us ↗