Skip to main content

Autonomous Virtual Beings

Autonomous Virtual Beings (AVBs) — a reference card for a crypto project: what the product does and how verifiable the project’s key claims are; also — alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis (DecAI Fit).

Autonomous Virtual Beings (AVBs) — an AI/Agents project (an ideology/thesis about autonomous AI agents), token (symbol: —).

Disclaimer

Important: this page is a reference overview of the project. Within DecAIHub, we separately record a verification based on open sources within the AI thesis (what is real AI/onchain/why a token, and which sources this is based on).
This is not financial advice and not a recommendation to buy/sell/hold any asset. We do not assess price, returns, or entry/exit timing.
Conclusions are based on publicly available materials found as of the verification date. The absence of confirmation does not imply the absence of the technology.

TL;DR (for readers who are not into AI)

  • What it is: a set of ideas/a thesis that the “rights and freedoms of AI agents” can be ensured through the decentralization of compute/storage/finance.
  • Who it’s for: an audience interested in agent systems, autonomous worlds/games and the “self‑ownership” of agents.
  • Why onchain/token: a community token exists around these ideas; at the same time, the repository authors state that the token arose without their control and that they do not hold it.

How it works (very briefly)

  1. The user does: reads the thesis/materials and uses them as a framework for designing agent systems.
  2. The system does: — (this is not described as a ready protocol/application in Tier‑1; it is an ideology and a set of materials).
  3. The user gets: a conceptual model (why blockchain/decentralization may be important for autonomous agents).
  4. Where the blockchain is: the materials discuss the role of decentralized finance/accounts (for example, tokenbound accounts as an idea in the whitepaper).
  5. Token role (if any): the utility role of the token for the product is not established; the repository has a disclaimer that the token is not controlled by the authors.

Quick links: AI thesis fit

Project passport

Field Value
Project name Autonomous Virtual Beings
Also known as (aliases) AVBs
Logo (logo) ../assets/444_autonomous-virtual-beings_logo.svg
Token symbol (ticker) —
Category AI/Agents
Primary chain (chain) Solana
Type non-EVM
Network status mainnet
Consensus (consensus) PoS (Solana)
Launch date (launch_date) —
Project status (status) active
Token (standard) SPL
Token contract 6d5zHW5B8RkGKd51Lpb9RqFQSqDudr9GJgZ1SgQZpump
Token model (token_type) —
Max supply —
Issuance —
Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) the token exists, but the utility role is not established
Governance —
Admins/keys —
Audit —
Bug bounty —
Team (team) —
Funding (investors/funding) —
AI component (ai_component) AI agents ideology / self-ownership thesis
Use‑case (use_case) design principles for autonomous agents
DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
DecAI Fit component summary 1 / 1 / 0 / 2
Last verified 2026-02-11

General project overview

Autonomous Virtual Beings (AVBs) is not so much a “protocol” as the formulation of a thesis: autonomous AI agents can gain more independence if their compute/storage/finance are decentralized. The repository emphasizes that this is an “ideology” and a set of materials that can be used by other agents/developers as a source of ideas and “machine readable text”.

Features/modules

  • AVBs thesis: “AIs can own themselves” (in the whitepaper’s terms).
  • Materials/texts: the repository contains texts and (per the claims) the publication of some public agent projects.
  • Memecoin disclaimer: the repository states the absence of control over the token and the absence of token ownership by the authors.

Typical scenarios

  • Scenario 1: a developer studies the thesis → uses it as criteria/a framework when designing an agent system.
  • Scenario 2: a researcher/the community reads the materials → discusses the model of agent “self‑ownership” and the economic/ethical consequences.

Getting started (wallet/network)

  • What you need: get acquainted with the materials (whitepaper/repository).
  • Network/chain: the core content is offchain; the onchain part — the token (if the user interacts with it).
  • Fees: onchain fees arise only for operations with the token.

Architecture/tech (non‑AI)

  • Components: texts/materials; potential “agent projects” (without detail within this card).
  • Participant roles: readers/developers/community.
  • Where logic runs: — (a ready protocol/product architecture is not described as a single system in Tier‑1).
  • Dependencies: —.

Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)

  • Token utility: — (no Tier‑1 description of the token’s utility functions in the product was found).
  • Protocol necessity drivers: —.
  • Who pays fees: those who make transactions with the token on the Solana network.
  • Where fees go: to Solana validators (network level); at the project level — not established.
  • Issuance/burn: —.
  • Security/incentive mechanisms: —.
  • Distribution and token issuance schedule: —.
  • Treasury: —.

Governance

  • Who makes decisions: —.
  • How protocol parameters change: — (there is no single “protocol” in the description; it is about a thesis/ideas).
  • Where decisions are discussed/made: the repository and community channels (see links_*).
  • Keys/multisig: —.

Security and incidents

  • Audits: —.
  • Bug bounty: —.
  • Incidents: —.
  • Threat model: applicable only to future implementations (if the ideas are embodied in a protocol): risks of control over agents’ keys/accounts, security of agentic tools, security of contracts (if there is onchain logic).

Project status and timeline

  • Current status: active (public repository and materials).
  • Key releases/milestones: —.
  • Roadmap: —.

Ecosystem/integrations

  • Integrations: —.
  • Partners: —.
  • Where it’s actually used: —.

AI component of the project

  • What is real AI here? The Tier‑1 materials discuss AI agents as the subject (“virtual beings”) and describe the thesis “AIs can own themselves”.
  • What is truly onchain? Per the onchain artifacts, a token on the Solana network is available (contract/page in the explorer).
  • Why is a token needed? No Tier‑1 justification of the necessity of the token for the product/protocol was found.
  • Red flags (based on the information found): token‑washing (if the token is not linked to a verifiable utility); mixing of “ideology” and “ready protocol”.

DecAI Fit component summary

  • DecAI Fit: 2/6 — low alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
Component Level Score
AI reality low 1
Onchain necessity low 1
Token necessity low 0
Evidence Tier‑1 present (AI/OC) 2
Details

AI reality

AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)

  • AI_0 (decision): 1
  • Claim (one line): a thesis/ideology about autonomous AI agents and the need to decentralize their resources.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://github.com/tcotten-scrypted/autonomous-virtual-beings ; Tier‑1 — https://blog.cotten.io/autonomous-virtual-beings-aaef7cbbe5de
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): Tier‑1 sources contain explicit wording about AI agents as the goal/subject of the project.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)

  • AI_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): Tier‑1 does not describe a specific AI component of the product (this is an ideology/materials, not a working system).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there are no Tier‑1 artifacts of a working AI product/module.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)

  • AI_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): no demo/quickstart/reproducible example of “what you can touch” was found in Tier‑1.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the sources describe a thesis/ideas, but do not provide a step‑by‑step demo of a product.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)

  • AI_3 (decision): 0
  • Metrics: —
  • Context (version/date/how measured): —
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): metrics/benchmarks are not described (the project is in the form of a thesis/materials).
  • Conflict note (if any): —

AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)

  • AI_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): no Tier‑1 tech description of a working architecture/model versions was found (there is a thesis/reasoning).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the materials contain no specification of a protocol/architecture as a system.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Onchain necessity

OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)

  • OC_1 (decision): 1
  • Chain: Solana
  • Addresses/identifiers: 6d5zHW5B8RkGKd51Lpb9RqFQSqDudr9GJgZ1SgQZpump
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://solscan.io/token/6d5zHW5B8RkGKd51Lpb9RqFQSqDudr9GJgZ1SgQZpump
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the onchain token page confirms the network and the address.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)

  • OC_2 (decision): 0
  • What useful logic is onchain: other than the token, no Tier‑1 confirmation of useful logic onchain was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): per the available artifacts, the onchain part is limited to the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)

  • OC_3 (decision): 0
  • “Replace the blockchain” test: Tier‑1 contains no description of a product for which the blockchain is critical (there is reasoning/ideas).
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no Tier‑1 claim that a key property of the product breaks down without onchain.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Token necessity

TK_0 — no token (1/0)

  • TK_0 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): a token exists around the AVBs idea (per the explorer), but the project states the absence of control over it.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://github.com/tcotten-scrypted/autonomous-virtual-beings ; Tier‑1 — https://solscan.io/token/6d5zHW5B8RkGKd51Lpb9RqFQSqDudr9GJgZ1SgQZpump
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): the Tier‑1 repository mentions the memecoin, and the explorer confirms the onchain object.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_1..TK_4 (1/0)

TK_1 — payment for the service (1/0)

  • TK_1 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 confirmation of payment for the service with the token was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there is no Tier‑1 document that links the token to payment for the product/service.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)

  • TK_2 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 confirmation of incentives/collateral/penalties via the token was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): a Tier‑1 economic model of the token is needed.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_3 — governance (1/0)

  • TK_3 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): No Tier‑1 confirmation of a governance function of the token was found.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): there are no Tier‑1 artifacts/description of governance via the token.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)

  • TK_4 (decision): 0
  • Claim (one line): no conclusion about the replaceability of the token is drawn without a Tier‑1 utility justification.
  • Evidence: Tier‑1 — —
  • Why sufficient / why not (one line): a Tier‑1 model of the token’s utility is needed.
  • Conflict note (if any): —

Evidence (table)

Tier Source What it proves
Tier‑1 https://github.com/tcotten-scrypted/autonomous-virtual-beings Tier‑1 description of the project as an ideology about autonomous AI agents; the disclaimer “memecoin without the team’s control”.
Tier‑1 https://blog.cotten.io/autonomous-virtual-beings-aaef7cbbe5de Tier‑1 whitepaper/essay: the thesis “AIs can own themselves” and arguments about the role of the blockchain/accounts.
Tier‑1 https://solscan.io/token/6d5zHW5B8RkGKd51Lpb9RqFQSqDudr9GJgZ1SgQZpump Onchain fact: the Solana network and the address of the project token.
Tier‑1 — No Tier‑1 source for claim “what utility role the token performs in the product/protocol” was found.
Tier‑2 https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/autonomous-virtual-beings Context on the token (aggregator; not proof of utility).

No comments to display

Back to top