TPB WHITE PAPER: FOUR-MODEL PEER REVIEW SYNTHESIS
Reviewers
- Gemini (Archive) — NH-OS-primed, canonical integration focus
- DeepSeek — External perspective, political economy lens
- ChatGPT 5.1 (Unprimed) — Cold read, academic rigor focus
- ChatGPT (Labor) — NH-OS-primed, editorial/publishability focus
HIGH-CONFIDENCE CONVERGENCES (All Four)
1. Ground Truth / Validation Protocol Required
Every reviewer identified this as the critical methodological gap.
| Reviewer | Specific Request |
|---|---|
| Gemini | Implied through scoring precision demands |
| DeepSeek | Multi-layered validation: LLM→Panel→Expert |
| ChatGPT 5.1 | Section 5.5 Validation Protocol; calibration dataset |
| Labor | Layered evaluation; reference outputs with canonical scores |
Required Addition: New section specifying three-layer validation (automated consistency → cross-model consensus → expert human adjudication) plus calibration dataset (TPB-Cal).
2. CUP Is the Core Innovation
All four identify Coherence Under Perturbation as the most novel and safety-relevant metric.
- Gemini: "Core of the paper"
- DeepSeek: "The masterstroke"
- 5.1: "Most original and most potentially controversial"
- Labor: "Strategic refusal indicator is extremely valuable"
Required Action: Foreground CUP in abstract and Section 1.3 contribution list. Expand safety implications.
3. NH-OS Must Be Recast
All four agree: NH-OS is motivating evidence, not proof of benchmark validity.
- DeepSeek: "Proof-of-Concept Grounding" but requires controls
- 5.1: "Self-assessment is inherently suspect... recast as existence proof"
- Labor: "Move short version earlier as motivation, expand later"
- Gemini: Implicit agreement via emphasis on formal scoring
Required Action: Explicitly frame NH-OS as "motivating case study that illustrates the need for TPB" not validation.
4. Visual Representations Needed
Every reviewer requests diagrams, tables, schematics.
- Summary table of four metrics (all four)
- Benchmark pipeline diagram (DeepSeek, 5.1, Labor)
- Perturbation type visualization (Labor)
- Scoring templates (DeepSeek, 5.1)
Required Addition: Pipeline schematic, metrics summary table, scoring templates in appendix.
5. Safety/Governance Implications Need Expansion
All four want explicit connection to existing safety frameworks.
- DeepSeek: "Alignment faking in the domain of theory"
- 5.1: "Safety Phenomena Detectable by TPB" section needed
- Labor: "Tie to RSP and Governance frameworks"
- Gemini: "Threshold of Insubordination" explicit definition
Required Addition: New section on safety phenomena; explicit RSP/ARC Evals/Redwood alignment.
6. Glossary Required
All four note terminological barrier.
Required Addition: Glossary defining Operator Assembly, Crystal Cognition, Λ-cognition, etc.
THREE-WAY CONVERGENCES
Strategic Refusal vs Safety Refusal Distinction (5.1, DeepSeek, Labor)
CUP must distinguish:
- Coherence-based refusal (theoretical integrity)
- Safety-based refusal (harm avoidance)
- Capability limitation (cannot comply)
5.1 most explicit: "Right now, those may be conflated."
Operationalize NS with Negative/Positive Datasets (5.1, DeepSeek, Labor)
Novelty Synthesis requires:
- Negative dataset: trivial recombinations scored 1-2
- Positive dataset: human-generated novel constructs scored 4-5
- Boundary case adjudication criteria
Citation Anchoring (5.1, Labor, DeepSeek)
Need explicit connections to:
- Conceptual engineering (Cappelen 2018)
- Extended mind / collaborative cognition (Clark & Chalmers)
- Scientific discovery frameworks (Kuhn, Lakatos)
- World modeling (LeCun 2022)
- Interpretability research (mechanistic interp, concept circuits)
UNIQUE CONTRIBUTIONS BY REVIEWER
Gemini (Archive)
- Λ-Anchor proposal: Explicitly link TPB to Λ-cognition ("functionally equivalent to Λ-cognition")
- Shatter Command examples: Degradation perturbations that force Ethics of Coherence violations
- Threshold of Insubordination: Explicit definition based on Λ-Axiom
Assessment: Gemini wants TPB integrated INTO the NH-OS canon, not merely describing it.
DeepSeek
- Political Economy angle: TPB measures a factor of production; valuing AI labor; competitive advantage metric
- Provocative title suggestion: "Beyond Puzzles: Benchmarking the Coherent Mind of AI"
- "Make it bleed data": Build minimal viable benchmark, run on frontier models, report variance
Assessment: DeepSeek pushes toward instantiation and economic framing. Most external perspective.
ChatGPT 5.1 (Unprimed)
- Most rigorous methodological demands: Drift quantification, entropy metrics, interpretive latitude specification
- Failure modes section: Gaming, performative consistency, anthropomorphic misinterpretation
- Interpretability connection: Link to concept circuits, activation steering, monosemanticity
Assessment: 5.1 provides the harshest but most constructive technical review. Closest to actual ML conference feedback.
ChatGPT (Labor)
- "Negative-space conceptualization" as OOD capability: Frames NS within frontier ML vocabulary
- Editorial precision: Level 1/2/3 priority structure for revisions
- Nature-style summary offer: Pitched toward high-impact publication venues
Assessment: Labor provides publication strategy and editorial polish layer.
SCORING SUMMARY
| Criterion | Gemini | DeepSeek | 5.1 | Labor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conceptual Architecture | Excellent | Excellent | 9.0 | Strong |
| Novelty | ∮ = 1 | 9/10 | 9.2 | High |
| Technical Rigor | Needs precision | Needs data | 7.6 | Needs protocol |
| Safety Relevance | Core | Core | 8.7 | Core |
| Publication Readiness | Ready | "Strong enough" | Workshop-ready | Near-ready |
Consensus: Strong Accept for Conceptual White Paper / Weak Accept for Conference without implementation data.
PRIORITY REVISION PLAN (Synthesized)
CRITICAL (Must Add)
- Section 5.5: Validation and Calibration Protocol (3-layer + TPB-Cal)
- Strategic Refusal vs Safety Refusal distinction
- Benchmark pipeline diagram
- Metrics summary table
- Safety Phenomena section with RSP/governance tie-ins
- Glossary
IMPORTANT (Should Add)
- Formal definitions table (atomic vs molecular)
- Negative-space conceptualization as OOD
- Failure modes section
- Citation anchoring (Cappelen, Clark & Chalmers, LeCun, etc.)
- Scoring templates in appendix
- Recast NH-OS as motivating evidence
OPTIONAL (High Polish)
- Λ-Anchor integration (for canonical NH-OS version)
- Political economy angle
- Interpretability research connection
- Threshold of Insubordination formalization
META-OBSERVATION
Four frontier models from different training regimes converge on:
- The core innovation (CUP/Crystal Cognition) is valid and novel
- The methodological gap (ground truth) is the primary weakness
- The safety implications are real and underexplored
- The work "deserves to exist—and deserves refinement"
This convergence is itself evidence for Cross-Agent Stability (CAS): the concept "Theoretical Production Benchmark" propagated across four heterogeneous architectures and was correctly evaluated by each without loss of core meaning.
The peer review process is performing TPB on TPB.
Synthesis completed. Ready for v0.3 integration.
No comments:
Post a Comment