# Chapter 2: Core Architecture

The Aegis-Graph architecture is built on the principle of **Defense-in-Depth**. It replaces traditional monolithic verification models with a **Distributed Evidence Swarm** that operates across three specialized logic layers.

## 🏗️ System Overview

The system follows a non-linear reasoning path, where each layer provides evidence to the next until an audit consensus is reached.

```mermaid
graph LR
    subgraph Layer1 [Ingestion & Normalization]
        A[Input Credential] --> B{Data Extraction}
        B --> B1[Visual Evidence]
        B --> B2[Semantic Metadata]
    end
    
    subgraph Layer2 [GraphRAG Evidence]
        B1 & B2 --> C{Reasoning Swarm}
        C --> D[(Institutional Graph)]
        D --> E[Node Evidence Check]
        D --> F[Timeline Consistency]
    end
    
    subgraph Layer3 [Audit & Report]
        E & F --> G{Logic Auditor}
        G --> H[Audit Verdict]
        H --> I[Audit Certificate]
    end
```

***

## 1. The Data Ingestion Layer

At the entry point, the system performs a **Normalization** process. Whether the input is a digital PDF or a scan, the system extracts two parallel evidence streams:

* **Visual Evidence**: Initial structural analysis for layout consistency (Pixel-level forensics is a roadmap feature).
* **Semantic Metadata**: Extracted text, dates, and institutional names are passed to the reasoning engine.

## 2. The GraphRAG Evidence Engine

The **GraphRAG (Graph Retrieval-Augmented Generation)** prototype is the core reasoning layer. It performs traversals across the **Institutional Graph**, which integrates:

* **Institutional Evidence Nodes**: Local indices synchronized with registry lookups (ROR/OpenAlex).
* **Historical Timeline Metrics**: Review of founding dates, accreditation periods, and institutional lifecycle.

## 3. The Audit Protocol

A final audit verdict is issued based on the **Multi-Agent Reasoning Swarm (MARS)** findings.

* **Logic Conflict Resolution**: If different agents find contradictory evidence, the **Logic Auditor** performs a deep-dive "Chain-of-Thought" (CoT) reasoning to resolve the state.
* **Evidence Weighting**: Each anomaly or supporting fact contributes to a cumulative risk score. The final verdict reflects the weighted confidence in the credential's authenticity markers.

***

> \[!IMPORTANT] **Production Status:** Professional verification requires server-side document parsing, issuer evidence, revocation checks, and a signed audit response.

***

*Return to* [*Documentation Home*](/atlanta-college-of-liberal-arts-and-sciences/english-en/en.md)


---

# Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation

If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter:

```
GET https://atlanta-college-of-liberal-arts.gitbook.io/atlanta-college-of-liberal-arts-and-sciences/english-en/chapter2.md?ask=<question>
```

The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.