KTW Controller Kelly · Taguchi · Weibull — probabilistic control · INPI patent 2026

BCUB3 Lab

Understand the AI we integrate.

This page exists for two reasons. First: explain in plain language, without formulas, what lives under the hood of the models we deploy with our industrial clients. Second: present our three INPI-filed patents — one neural activation function (sWELU) and two probabilistic controllers (KTW · B1 and B2) — that make AI more efficient and more deployable on a shop floor than in a data center.

Section 3

Three INPI-filed patents

We file patents because our industrial clients need to build their AI strategy on foundations with clear intellectual property. One neural activation function (sWELU) and two probabilistic controllers for industrial process control (KTW B1 and B2). Here they are, explained without formulas, using everyday analogies.

01

sWELU — Sequential Weighted ELU

FR2513029 (filed) · Paul Obara · Neural activation functions

What it is, in one sentence

When a neural network learns, it constantly computes averages. sWELU corrects a subtle error in that average — an error that prevents small models from learning as efficiently as the very large ones.

Why it matters in industry

A 100-million-parameter model equipped with sWELU can learn things we used to think were reserved for multi-billion-parameter giants. Practical for the edge (cameras, sensors, robots) where memory is tight.

Analogy

Picture an orchestra. The conductor coordinates the average tempo. If their metronome is slightly off, every musician drifts. sWELU recalibrates the metronome.

02

KTW · B1 — Predictive industrial control via Kelly + Weibull modulation

INPI filed 2026-01-08 · Paul Obara · Process control

What it is, in one sentence

When an industrial machine drifts from its setpoint — say, a filler meant to deliver exactly 75 cl —, you need to decide how much to correct. Correct too much: the machine oscillates. Correct too little: defects pile up. Our patent computes the right dose of correction from two ingredients: the probability that the deviation is a real drift (Weibull over the last 50 measurements) and the Kelly criterion to size the intervention.

Why it matters in industry

Less scrap, less variability, without an expert operator constantly arbitrating. The system distinguishes measurement noise from real drift on its own and intervenes only when statistically justified.

Analogy

Like a smart thermostat. Instead of cutting in and out on every 0.1 °C wobble — including a brief draft — it listens to whether the drift is real. Then it scales its action: do nothing on noise, act firmly on a true trend.

03

KTW · B2 — Closed-loop probabilistic control + dynamic setpoint re-centering

INPI filed 2026-01-08 · Paul Obara · Probabilistic closed loop

What it is, in one sentence

Extension of B1. Instead of holding a fixed setpoint, the system adjusts the setpoint itself based on the quality loss measured on produced parts (Taguchi loss). The machine learns to re-center itself throughout production.

Why it matters in industry

Shop-floor parameters drift — ambient temperature, tool wear, material batches. The system re-centers without human intervention. Result: fewer silent failures, stable quality even when the environment shifts.

Analogy

An experienced driver doesn't try to hold a fixed ideal trajectory. They adjust the wheel to minimize fatigue, fuel use, and passenger discomfort — the 'right line' evolves with the trip. The patent automates that adaptation for an industrial process.

Section 4

Antifragility — why our systems get better when the shop floor shifts

On an industrial site, the environment is never static: raw materials vary, sensors drift, operators rotate, seasons shift the temperatures. A rigid system degrades. A robust system resists. An antifragile system — in Nassim Taleb's sense — learns from stress and gets better. That is the principle behind our R&D.

01

Robust is not antifragile

A robust thermostat holds steady despite fluctuations. An antifragile thermostat learns from those fluctuations to better anticipate the next one. Our KTW controllers go beyond robustness: they use every drift as training signal, without human intervention.

02

Guided evolution of strategies

Rather than freezing an AI strategy, we let it mutate under measured constraints: user satisfaction, latency, token cost, error rate. The approach draws on recent academic work in reflective prompt evolution (GEPA, 2025) and genetic programming. The best variant survives; the others are retired.

03

Engraved kernel, mutable harness

We separate two layers in every system we ship. The kernel — safety invariants, output contracts, business policy — is engraved and never mutates. The harness — phrasings, hyperparameters, heuristics — evolves continuously. This split guarantees operational stability while still allowing learning.

Multi-pod harness in continuous evolution

Nika OS — technical documentation

The agentic runtime we use in-house to orchestrate swarms of Claude Code, persist knowledge, and pilot the KTW probabilistic controllers. Ten technical pages, in English and French.

A question, a concrete case?

Our R&D exists for your industrial cases.

If one of these topics sheds light on a problem you're hitting in the field — defect detection, machine drift, non-standardized documents — let's talk.

Discuss a concrete case