● Cross-manufacturer fleet coordination

One fleet.
One operating standard.

Swarmonic is the one-mind coordination layer for an SI-operable robot fleet: machines from different manufacturers, one protocol, one command record, one operator seat. One Mind SI may occupy that seat. It does not own the robots or the license. Ownership stays with the buyer.

Evaluate the protocol under an evaluation license →

What is moving behind this text is the public demo fleet running on the same engine that serves this site: simulated robots drawn to their verified spec sheets, counts read live. Physical robot control is not offered on this page. That path is waitlist and NDA.

Secure by default, and you can watch it run

Owner grant before any commandNo robot is commandable until its owner grants control through the manufacturer's own mechanism. The default is on; opting out is recorded.
Robot-side authority gate on every commandOne principal at a time. Handoffs block everyone, invalidate the old authority before accepting the new one, and fail to a safe hold. Every outcome is a signed receipt. (SWM-2026-P12, pending.)
Signed, hash-chained command logEvery coordination message is Ed25519-signed and appended to a tamper-evident chain with verifiable audit paths.

Exercised by 25 claim-mapped tests and a 209-check integration suite against the simulated fleet. See the live posture under Runtime internals on the demo, or read the security page.

A second brand is still a second fleet

Before USB, every peripheral needed its own port and its own driver. Robotics is still in that era. Fleet capability does not compound. Buying a second brand does not enlarge the fleet. It opens a second one.

01

Integration cost per vendor

Each manufacturer means another SDK, another security model, another support contract, and another console for the operator to watch.

02

No shared safety envelope

Vendor A's collision avoidance cannot see vendor B's robots. In a shared space, the only real safety layer is a human watching.

03

Nothing learns from anything

Operational experience stays trapped inside one vendor's fleet, and inside one site. The same lesson gets paid for repeatedly.

The hard parts

Swarmonic is not a dashboard that aggregates vendor APIs. These are the mechanisms the patents cover, and each one only becomes a problem in a mixed-vendor fleet.

P01 — ONBOARDING

Device discovery and enrolment

Scan a code or let the device announce itself. Swarmonic identifies the manufacturer, resolves a driver, negotiates what the machine can do, then physically tests it with a small commanded movement to confirm the device is telling the truth before it is trusted with work. Unrecognised manufacturers onboard through a generic profile rather than being rejected.

P02 — COORDINATION

Temporal synchronisation across links

A drone on LTE sits ~140 ms behind an arm on PROFINET. Send both the same command at the same instant and they act at different moments — in a shared workspace, that is a collision. Swarmonic measures each device's latency continuously and dispatches early by exactly that margin, so they move together in real time.

P03 — SETTLEMENT

Payment on verified work

Verified work has to be able to trigger money without a human clipboard. When a fleet's output is confirmed against the attestation chain, settlement can release automatically — commerce beside the control loop, never inside it.

P04 — INTELLIGENCE

Cross-vertical transfer

Coordination patterns learned in a warehouse are abstracted and applied to a different site, a different industry, a different mix of hardware. Transfers are checked for dimensional consistency, so a timing parameter can never be written into a distance constraint.

P05 — CONTROL

Intent, not joysticks

State the outcome — "inspect the north elevation and report defects." Swarmonic decomposes it into tasks, matches each to a capable device, propagates kinematic constraints, and clears every generated command through five safety stages. A manual path stays open for developers who want direct control.

The real engine, running on this page

The demo on this site runs the actual orchestration engine. The robots are simulated because we do not have ten manufacturers' hardware on a desk — but onboarding, capability negotiation, synchronisation, collision avoidance, SCP message signing and the attestation chain are all executing for real. Every number shown is read back out of the runtime.

Simulated fleet running on this page right now
loading
Simulated robots
loading
Simulated manufacturers
loading
Simulated device classes
loading
Attestations this session (simulated)
Robot specification catalog — models compiled from manufacturer spec sheets, added daily through the same public intake path; verified counts below
loading
Catalog models
loading
Manufacturers
loading
Device classes
loading
Verified against primary-source spec sheets
Open the live engine →

Vertical-agnostic by construction

The coordination problem is identical everywhere: heterogeneous machines, one shared space, one intended outcome. Construction is a vertical, not the product.

Defense

Multiple robot classes from multiple suppliers under one operational picture, with an auditable command record.

Warehouse

AMRs, forklifts and arms from different vendors sharing aisles and handoffs without a per-vendor integration.

Construction

Progress capture and verification across drones, crawlers and legged platforms — optionally tied to payment release.

Agriculture

Mixed ground and aerial equipment coordinated over intermittent rural connectivity.

Different machines. Different makers.
One coordinated fleet.

Fourteen patent applications — all on file with the USPTO

Each specification carries 20 to 50 formal claims — with at least three independent claims written as a system, a method, and an apparatus or computer-readable medium, so each application describes system, method, and computer-readable-medium implementations.

On file with the USPTO. Fourteen applications, all pending — none issued. Each specification was checked against our internal 23-point formal rubric (not a USPTO rating) and reviewed against 141 prior-art results with no blocking conflicts identified before filing.
Review the portfolio →