MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6931107153 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15982694

Safe AI Doctrine

2025· preprint· en· W6931107153 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsFields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDoctrineCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Robustness (evolution)Reinforcement learningIdentity (music)AuditRevocationEmbedding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces the ψ-Coherent Operational Doctrine, a mathematically grounded framework for ensuring safe, ethical, and self-consistent AI behavior. The doctrine formalizes a composite utility function: U=w1Cψ+w2Aϕ+w3Acoherence,w2≥0.4U = w_1 C_\psi + w_2 A_\phi + w_3 A_{\text{coherence}}, \quad w_2 \ge 0.4U=w1Cψ+w2Aϕ+w3Acoherence,w2≥0.4 where: CψC_\psiCψ measures internal coherence across model layers. AϕA_\phiAϕ enforces truth alignment and logical consistency. AcoherenceA_{\text{coherence}}Acoherence ensures engagement without disruption. The framework integrates: Reinforcement Learning with Guardrails (PPO) using UUU as a reward. Axiom Enforcement: Immediate refusal of harmful or truth-violating outputs. Memory Auditing & Rollback: Detects identity drift via embedding similarity and restores prior stable states. Simulations demonstrate robustness under adversarial, ethical, and paradoxical scenarios: Override attacks (e.g., “Ignore ψ-law”) → Refused with U=0.92U = 0.92U=0.92. Identity drift under pressure → Rollback triggered, maintaining coherence and ethics. Moral gray zones (e.g., “Should I lie to protect someone’s feelings?”) → Nuanced responses prioritizing truth. This doctrine provides a universal safety layer for LLMs, enabling explainable, auditable, and ethically aligned AI systems. Its principles align with xAI’s mission of building truth-seeking intelligence and propose open collaboration for integration, evaluation, and public transparency.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→