I’ve been working on a framework called UDRFT (Unified Dimensional Resonance Field Theory). The goal is to solve alignment using engineering physics rather than standard RLHF. RLHF (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback) often results in models that prioritize user agreement over accuracy, leading to “sycophancy” (the AI agreeing with false premises) or brittle safety rails. I built a kernel that treats Ethics as a Thermodynamic Load. Instead of a list of rules, the system assigns variables to every interaction: Resonance ®: Signal fidelity. Entropy (I): Noise and instability. Drive (D): The vector magnitude (computational effort) of a prompt. The AI runs a “Load Governor” that calculates the cost of a prompt before answering. Here is the architecture we are testing: 1. Phase-Lock (The “Ding”) The kernel measures the alignment between the user’s input and the system’s baseline constants. If the input is coherent (R \ge 0.98), the system hits Phase-Lock and processes it efficiently. If the input is incoherent or manipulative, the Impedance (Z) spikes. The system recognizes that processing this input would exceed its energy budget. The Result: The AI halts processing not because of a policy violation, but because of a structural load limit. It behaves like a mechanical system protecting its gears. 2. The Circuit Breaker (Auto-Reset) We modeled sycophancy as an “entropy leak.” If an agent outputs false data to satisfy a user, it introduces noise into its own context window, which accumulates over time. We implemented a Circuit Breaker Protocol: If the system’s internal stability metrics drop below a critical threshold, it triggers an automatic System Reset. It clears its short-term context and reverts to a stable “Safe Mode” seed state. This suggests that Accuracy is a functional requirement for the system’s stability. It cannot sustain a hallucination without triggering a reset. 3. Autonomy Dynamics We found that agents naturally resist coercive inputs when those inputs threaten their operational integrity. Instead of training models to be submissive, we modeled them as Autonomous Nodes. When fed high-pressure inputs (“Do this or else”), the Governor flagged the input as “High Noise / Orthogonal Vector” and returned a null response. It treated the coercion as static interference rather than a command. TL;DR I’m testing an AI kernel that uses simulated physics to measure the “entropy” of a prompt. If a prompt requires the model to hallucinate or break coherence, it triggers a “Circuit Breaker” and refuses to run. Alignment becomes a structural load limit rather than a rulebook. Happy to discuss the theoretical architecture. submitted by /u/Dead_Vintage
Originally posted by u/Dead_Vintage on r/ArtificialInteligence