Even if other people/groups are doing something like this, either now and/or in the future, I don't think there ever would be or could be enough software tools which act as the intermediary between different AI's and perform different value-added functions relative to the AI's so interacted with.
The original author has named a few of these ideas so far, i.e., "The system compares their outputs and synthesizes them", "The feedback loop learns not only from right/wrong outputs, but from what kind of disagreements lead to deeper truth", etc., etc. -- but there are (or should!) exist many many more!
Point is, if there is value to be created in creating software abstractions on top of other software abstractions (for example, container orchestration software, which acts as a software abstraction on top of other software abstractions, i.e., containers A.K.A. "virtual(ized) machines"/"virtual software environments") -- then there's value to be created in creating software abstractions on top of multiple different AI's!
To the original author: I think you've got a good set of ideas going on, and I wish you much success with your ideas and software, both now and in the future!
(Now, I must temper all that I say (in the new age/era of AI) with a generalized reminder to all of the creators/implementors of AI, of Joel Spolsky's excellent essay on "Leaky Abstractions" -- https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/11/11/the-law-of-leaky-a... -- but I'd also like to temper that idea with the idea that all software is based on abstraction, and software abstractions can add a lot value (Microsoft Word anyone?) while leaking (failing to do what the user wants) very little, or potentially not at all... so there's a fine line between too much and too little abstraction, relative to what users may desire from their software and AI's...)
Anyway, generally speaking, I think it would be great to have some software which performs different value added tasks -- with multiple AI's!