> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://docs.lpp-minduniverse.org/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://docs.lpp-minduniverse.org/lingua-pactum-protocol-lpp-documentation/7.-mind-universe-governance-stack/7.3-faithlocked.md).

# 7.3 FaithLocked

**FaithLocked** is the Semantic Admission Firewall of the Mind Universe governance stack.

Its current canonical role is:

> **Preserve semantic integrity before task and action governance proceed.**

The principal concerns are:

* semantic integrity,
* context drift,
* semantic contamination,
* and unauthorized instruction substitution.

#### Semantic Integrity

A governance architecture cannot preserve legitimate intent if its working semantic environment is already unstable.

FaithLocked therefore evaluates whether statements entering task governance remain structurally and semantically suitable for processing.

The reference Jarvis module architecture historically places FaithLocked in the semantic intake path:

```
User Statement
        ↓
CHECK
        ↓
FaithLocked
        ↓
SemanticLegit
        ↓
StructCheck
        ↓
Structured Statement
```

In GitBook v2.0, this path should be understood as **semantic admission / statement intake governance**.

It is not the LPP Admission Kernel.

#### Context Drift

Context drift occurs when the effective meaning of a task changes through accumulated interaction.

A later instruction may appear connected to earlier context while materially changing the operational objective.

FaithLocked helps constrain this type of semantic instability before it becomes embedded into the task structure.

#### Semantic Contamination

External or internal content may introduce semantics that were not legitimately part of the governed task.

Examples may include:

* injected instructions,
* misleading contextual material,
* untrusted retrieved content,
* responsibility-obscuring framing,
* or cross-module semantic leakage.

FaithLocked is intended to identify or restrict such contamination before task formation.

#### Unauthorized Instruction Substitution

A system should not silently replace:

```
Authorized / Governed Instruction A
```

with:

```
Unrelated Instruction B
```

merely because B appears later in context or is operationally convenient.

FaithLocked therefore contributes to preserving semantic continuity at the statement and context layer.

#### FaithLocked and Semantic Verification

FaithLocked must not be confused with the trajectory-level Semantic Verification defined in Chapter 6.

The distinction is:

```
FaithLocked
=
semantic integrity during statement / context governance
```

while:

```
Semantic Verification
=
does the evolved trajectory still preserve Human-Authorized Intent?
```

Therefore:

```
FaithLocked PASS
≠
Trajectory MATCH
```

and neither implies:

```
LPP ADMIT
```

#### Historical Rules and Current Boundary

Earlier Jarvis / FaithLocked specifications contain detailed blocking rules for issues such as semantic responsibility ambiguity, narrative simulation, conclusion steering, module-responsibility confusion, and task escalation.

Those materials remain subsystem design references.

GitBook v2.0 does not promote every historical heuristic into an LPP constitutional predicate.

The public canonical boundary remains:

> **FaithLocked governs semantic integrity. It does not create constitutional legitimacy.**

***