SentAI
SentAI — 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).
SentAI — an AI/Agents | DeFi project on the Ethereum network, token (symbol: SENTAI).
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 project describing an AI agent/platform for automating token creation and analyzing market/social sentiment.
- Who it’s for: communities/teams that launch and manage tokens; users of the Telegram interface (claimed in the roadmap).
- Why onchain/token: onchain is used for token issuance and circulation on the network (Ethereum); the token is claimed as part of an incentive/revenue distribution model (roadmap).
How it works (very briefly)
- The user does: interacts with the project’s AI agent/interface (for example, via Telegram; claimed in the roadmap).
- The system does: collects signals/trends (sentiment analysis; claimed in the whitepaper) and automates operations around launching/managing tokens (claimed).
- The user gets: tools/automation for creating and managing tokens + (claimed) trend alerts.
- Where the blockchain is: the token is deployed/circulates onchain (Ethereum); contracts and transactions are observable via the blockchain explorer.
- Token role (if any): the roadmap mentions a revenue sharing model for token holders.
Quick links: AI thesis fit
Project passport
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Project name | SentAI |
| Also known as (aliases) | The Sentinel AI, $SENTAI |
| Logo (logo) | ../assets/837_sentai_logo.jpg |
| Token symbol (ticker) | SENTAI |
| Category | AI/Agents | DeFi |
| Primary chain (chain) | Ethereum |
| Type | EVM |
| Network status | mainnet |
| Consensus (consensus) | PoS (Ethereum) |
| Launch date (launch_date) | — |
| Project status (status) | — |
| Token (standard) | ERC-20 |
| Token contract | 0x877f035c83df617B6C901891F90EEBc78f8CE050 |
| Token model (token_type) | — |
| Max supply | — |
| Issuance | — |
| Tokenomics (tokenomics, brief) | The roadmap mentions a revenue sharing model for token holders (details not disclosed). |
| Governance | — |
| Admins/keys | — |
| Audit | — |
| Bug bounty | — |
| Team (team) | — |
| Funding (investors/funding) | — |
| AI component (ai_component) | AI agent (sentiment analysis + token launches) |
| Use‑case (use_case) | token creation + trend signals |
| DecAI Fit — AI thesis fit | 4/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis |
| DecAI Fit component summary | ai_score 2 / onchain_score 1 / token_score 1 / evidence_score 3 |
| Last verified | 2026-02-11 |
Links (links_*)
| Type | Link |
|---|---|
| Website | https://sentai.info/ |
| Docs | https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper |
| GitHub | https://github.com/thesentinelai/contracts/ |
| Releases / Changelog | https://github.com/thesentinelai/contracts/commits |
| Whitepaper | https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper |
| Roadmap | https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper/appendix-d-roadmap |
| Security advisories | https://github.com/thesentinelai/contracts/security |
| Explorer | https://etherscan.io/token/0x877f035c83df617B6C901891F90EEBc78f8CE050 |
| X | https://twitter.com/SentAI_ETH |
| Discord | — |
| Telegram | https://t.me/SentAI_ETH |
| Medium | — |
| Audit report(s) | — |
| Bug bounty | — |
| CoinGecko (profile, reference) | — |
| CoinMarketCap (profile, reference) | https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/sentai/ |
General project overview
In the whitepaper, SentAI is positioned as a project combining AI automation and sentiment analysis (sentiment analysis) with tools for creating and managing tokens. The roadmap describes development stages and the release of an AI agent (including an interface via Telegram) and plans for integration with several networks.
Per Tier‑1 sources at the time of the check, no public demo/product that can be “touched” was found (AI_2=0), and no quality metrics for the AI part were found (AI_3=0). Therefore, any claims about “AI quality” require additional artifacts.
Features/modules
- AI agent (claimed): automation of operations around launching/managing tokens.
- Sentiment analysis engine (claimed): analysis of the “market pulse/trends” using data from external sources.
- Smart contracts (repository): there is a public repository,
thesentinelai/contracts.
Typical scenarios
- Scenario 1: a user interacts with an AI agent → receives (claimed) automation of token launching/management.
- Scenario 2: a user receives (claimed) signals/analytics on sentiment and trends → makes decisions outside the scope of DecAIHub (without financial advice).
Getting started (wallet/network)
- What you need: a wallet for Ethereum (if interaction with the token takes place onchain).
- Network/chain: Ethereum.
- Fees: Ethereum network fees for onchain operations.
Architecture/tech (non‑AI)
- Components (claimed): smart contracts (Solidity), indexing (The Graph), oracles (Chainlink), storage (IPFS), frontend (Vue.js).
- Where logic runs: AI/analytics — offchain; token issuance/circulation — onchain.
- Dependencies (claimed): Chainlink, The Graph, IPFS.
Token/economics (expanded, no forecasts)
- Token utility: the roadmap claims a revenue sharing model for token holders (details not established).
- Protocol necessity drivers: no strict explanation of “why without the token the product breaks down” was found per Tier‑1 (TK_4=0, OC_3=0).
- Fees: Ethereum network fees for onchain operations.
Governance
- Who makes decisions: not established per Tier‑1.
Security and incidents
- Audits: not found per Tier‑1.
- Bug bounty: not found per Tier‑1.
- Incidents: not established per Tier‑1.
Project status and timeline
- Current status: not established per Tier‑1.
- Roadmap: see
links_*(official whitepaper section).
Ecosystem/integrations
- Integrations (claimed): the tech stack mentions Chainlink, The Graph, IPFS; the roadmap — plans for integration with Base.
AI component of the project
- What is real AI here? The whitepaper claims AI automation and a real-time engine for sentiment analysis and trends.
- What is truly onchain? Per Tier‑1, the onchain part is confirmed in the form of an issued token (Ethereum; address in the explorer).
- Why is a token needed? The roadmap claims a revenue sharing model for token holders; implementation details are not established.
- Red flags (based on the information found): there is no Tier‑1 demo/product for “what you can touch”; there are no Tier‑1 AI quality metrics; claims about “predictive models” require artifacts (methodology, version, measurable results).
DecAI Fit component summary
- DecAI Fit: 4/6 — medium alignment with the Decentralized AI thesis
| Component | Level | Score |
|---|---|---|
| AI reality | high | 2 |
| Onchain necessity | low | 1 |
| Token necessity | low | 1 |
| Evidence | Tier‑1 present | 3 |
Details
AI reality
AI_0 — AI intent (Tier‑1 roadmap) (1/0)
- AI_0 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): There are signs of AI reality per Tier‑1 (see AI_1..AI_4), so the AI_0 flag (intent‑only) does not apply.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — see Evidence/links in AI_1..AI_4.
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_0=1 is admissible only when AI_1..AI_4=0; here ai_score without AI_0 = 2.
- Conflict note (if any): —
AI_1 — what the AI does (1/0)
- AI_1 (decision): 1
- Claim (one line): AI automation and real‑time sentiment analysis/trend detection are claimed for tasks around launching/managing tokens.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): The Tier‑1 text directly describes the purpose of the AI part (sentiment analysis + automation), albeit without quality metrics.
- Conflict note (if any): —
AI_2 — demos/examples (1/0)
- AI_2 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): No public demo/application reproducible “in one click” was found per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.info/
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): AI_2=1 requires a Tier‑1 demo/app/guide with reproducible steps; this is not established per the available links.
- Conflict note (if any): —
AI_3 — metrics/quality (1/0)
- AI_3 (decision): 0
- Metrics: —
- Context (version/date/how measured): —
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): No reproducible quality metrics/benchmarks for the AI part were found in the whitepaper/roadmap.
- Conflict note (if any): —
AI_4 — tech description/architecture/versions (1/0)
- AI_4 (decision): 1
- Claim (one line): The whitepaper describes the technology stack and components of the “sentiment‑predicting engine” (Ethereum/Base, IPFS, Chainlink, The Graph, etc.).
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper/appendix-c-technology-stack
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): There is a tech description at the level of components/integrations; model versions/datasets/metrics are not disclosed (this does not replace AI_3).
- Conflict note (if any): —
Onchain necessity
OC_1 — contracts/addresses/chain (1/0)
- OC_1 (decision): 1
- Chain: Ethereum
- Addresses/identifiers: 0x877f035c83df617B6C901891F90EEBc78f8CE050 (token contract)
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://etherscan.io/token/0x877f035c83df617B6C901891F90EEBc78f8CE050
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): The existence of the token contract and onchain data is confirmed by the blockchain explorer.
- Conflict note (if any): —
OC_2 — onchain beyond just a token (1/0)
- OC_2 (decision): 0
- What useful logic is onchain: no confirmation of mandatory onchain logic other than the token was found per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper ; https://github.com/thesentinelai/contracts/
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): Specific descriptions of functions/contracts used by the product “beyond the token” are required; this is not established per the available sources.
- Conflict note (if any): —
OC_3 — onchain is critical (1/0)
- OC_3 (decision): 0
- “Replace the blockchain” test: it is not established per Tier‑1 that a key property of the product breaks down without the blockchain.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): OC_3=1 requires an explicit justification of “why trustless/onchain is critical”; this was not found per Tier‑1.
- Conflict note (if any): —
Token necessity
TK_0 — no token (1/0)
- TK_0 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): The project has a claimed token, $SENTAI, on Ethereum.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper/appendix-d-roadmap ; https://etherscan.io/token/0x877f035c83df617B6C901891F90EEBc78f8CE050
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): The roadmap + the onchain explorer confirm the existence of the token.
- 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): The use of the token as mandatory payment for the service is not established per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): TK_1=1 requires an explicit Tier‑1 “what the token is used to pay for”; this was not found per the whitepaper/roadmap.
- Conflict note (if any): —
TK_2 — incentives/collateral/penalties (1/0)
- TK_2 (decision): 1
- Claim (one line): The roadmap claims a revenue sharing model for $SENTAI holders.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper/appendix-d-roadmap
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): This is a Tier‑1 claim about an incentive/benefit for token holders; the details of the mechanism require separate verification.
- Conflict note (if any): —
TK_3 — governance (1/0)
- TK_3 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): The use of the token for governance is not established per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): TK_3=1 requires Tier‑1 with a description of voting/rights mechanics; none was found per the available sources.
- Conflict note (if any): —
TK_4 — token is replaceable (1/0)
- TK_4 (decision): 0
- Claim (one line): The replaceability of the token (with a subscription/USDC) is not established per Tier‑1.
- Evidence: Tier‑1 — https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper
- Why sufficient / why not (one line): TK_4=1 requires an explicit justification of “the token is not needed/is replaceable”; this was not found per Tier‑1.
- Conflict note (if any): —
Evidence (table)
| Tier | Source | What it proves |
|---|---|---|
| Tier‑1 | https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper | Tier‑1 description: AI automation + real‑time sentiment analysis for token-related tasks. |
| Tier‑1 | https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper/appendix-d-roadmap | Roadmap: AI Agent releases (V1/V2), the $SENTAI token on Ethereum, revenue sharing (claimed). |
| Tier‑1 | https://sentai.gitbook.io/whitepaper/appendix-c-technology-stack | Tech stack: claimed components of the “sentiment‑predicting engine” and integrations (IPFS/Chainlink/The Graph). |
| Tier‑1 | https://etherscan.io/token/0x877f035c83df617B6C901891F90EEBc78f8CE050 | Onchain fact: the token contract on the Ethereum network. |
| Tier‑1 | https://github.com/thesentinelai/contracts/ | Public repository of the project’s smart contracts (existence of a code artifact). |
No comments to display
No comments to display