What was compared
The English text of the Constitution page as published on 29 October 2026 (production commit 465bc7f), against an internal document examined for that purpose: a working file of the Constitution held by Nyalai, in its state of 1 August 2026, the date of the last change to that file. This comparison does not say which of the two texts governs, and the way the page was prepared is not established by it. The internal document is not published; the excerpts below are quoted from it with their section number, with the spacing of punctuation and the bold formatting normalised and the wording unchanged. The comparison was made block by block after removing formatting, by software and then by reading. The internal document has 232 text blocks before its reading apparatus (its title and ratification stamp included); the page has 241 text blocks outside the editorial note (its header and table of contents included); 100 are identical; the differences fall into 31 groups, summarised here in seven families with one or two excerpts each. The full list is held in the internal dossier of that date.
1 · Provenance references
In 24 places, the internal document attributes a passage to the external exchange that produced it and to its ratification; the page carries the passage without that attribution, most often closing the sentence with a colon.
Internal document, §4: “The anchor that distinguishes what the Doctrine may revise from what it must preserve is the discipline surfaced by the external LLM adversary in Wave 4 (transcript Part 5, quote W4-A7) and ratified by Sébastien Assohou 2026-07-29:”
Page, §4: “The anchor that distinguishes what the Doctrine may revise from what it must preserve:”
The internal document also states, in §12: “Every integrated item is cited in-line with its wave, part, quote reference, and ratification date.” That sentence, and the paragraph that carries it, are not on the page.
2 · Passages of the internal document that are not on the page
Internal document, §10: “The v0.1.x patch entries preserved in the §14 supersession log are governed under this interim rule, not under the full §10 process, and each is labeled accordingly.” Not on the page, whose §14 carries no v0.1.x entry.
Internal document, §2: “External LLM adversary in Nyalai usage refers to a large language model prompt exchange treated as adversarial input against Nyalai's founding operator, not as external institutional review. Human institutional peer review is scheduled through the Scientific Council members per §8.” Not on the page.
Internal document, §3, opening of the non-negotiables: “Seven of them were sealed in the founding text ratified 2026-07-29. The eighth is the ultimate discipline surfaced by the external LLM adversary…” The page keeps only “Eight commitments bind every Nyalai agent, every essay, every verdict, in perpetuity.”
Internal document, §11.1: two paragraphs describing the language phases, beginning “Phase 1 (Q4 2026 launch). English and French ship together at the Étape 6 flip.” Not on the page, which carries instead three paragraphs of its own (family 3).
3 · Wording that differs
§9.7 · Internal document: the explainer is “made available to prospective counterparties during the pre-launch window.” Page: “available at nyalai.com/foundation.”
§11.1 · Internal document: “Beyond the founding baseline, Nyalai commits to quadrilingual coverage at Foundation level by the start of the first quarter of 2027.” Page: “Beyond the founding baseline, Nyalai adds languages in the sequence below, each keyed to a specific institutional cohort whose age and traditions predate ours.” The page then carries three paragraphs that the internal document does not contain, one of which reads: “Rationale: the Government Pension Investment Fund of Japan is the largest pension fund on the planet.” That sentence is the one corrected on 6 August 2026 according to §14; it does not appear in the state of the internal document examined.
§12 · Internal document: the preamble “was drafted by external LLM adversary (signal from a model outside the Anthropic family, contribution received and ratified by Sébastien Assohou 2026-07-29).” Page: “was drafted by ChatGPT (external LLM adversary signal from a model outside the Anthropic family).” The page names the model; the internal document does not.
§12.1 · Internal document: “The Validator: Cice. The operational engine that applies the method.” Page: “The operational framework that applies the method.”
4 · §14, the supersession log
The internal document carries eleven entries, labelled v0.1 to v0.1.9 (two of them under the label v0.1, one of which is marked OFFICIAL) and dated 29 July to 1 August 2026, written as a working log; they are not reproduced here because they contain internal file paths and working notes. The page carries a preamble and three dated entries: 30 July 2026 (amendment of §11.1), 30 July 2026 (procedural disclosure), 6 August 2026 (one-word correction). No entry has the same wording in both texts; the amendment of 30 July 2026 is recorded on both sides, in different forms; the correction of 6 August 2026 is recorded on the page only.
5 · Translation
§1, the preamble, twenty block quotations and the rationale paragraph of §11.1 are in French in the internal document and in English on the page.
Internal document, §4: « Une institution doit avoir des principes stables, mais des méthodes révisables. »
Page, §4: “An institution must have stable principles, but revisable methods.”
6 · Presentation and additions
The page compared, at commit 465bc7f, carried a header, a table of contents, a licence line, a footnote on the governing text (replaced on 12 October 2026, see the editorial journal), and the editorial note of 26 October 2026. The update of the page that publishes this comparison replaces that note with the note of 29 October 2026; the body of the Constitution is not changed by it. The internal document carries a ratification stamp. List numbering differs. None of this changes the wording of the body.
7 · Reading apparatus
After §14, the internal document carries sections titled “Sources read”, “Confidence per claim”, “Discrepancy flags” and “Quote fidelity note”, dated 29 July 2026. The page carries none of them.
What this comparison does not establish
Which of the two texts governs where they differ. How the page was prepared. Whether each difference was decided, by whom and when. Whether the English renderings of the French quotations were reviewed. Whether the French, Japanese and Chinese editions match either text: they were not compared word by word; one difference is already known, §2 of the French edition reads « légitimité » where the English page reads “authority” since 1 August 2026. The 12 files of the archived snapshot of 19 July 2026 that, as served at the time of the check of 29 October 2026, did not match their manifest are a separate matter, measured separately.
Provenance
Page: the English page as published on 29 October 2026, production commit 465bc7f. Internal document: the working file of the Constitution held by Nyalai, state of 1 August 2026. Both texts were preserved with their SHA256 in the internal dossier of 29 October 2026; the dossier is not published.
Distinct from the body of the Constitution. Written by the founding operator; not reviewed by a Scientific Council, which is not yet constituted.