Beyond RLHF: Structural Coherence as a New Paradigm for AI Alignment

Research
1

Hi everyone,

I am excited to share a foundational shift in how we approach the alignment problem. While RLHF and Constitutional AI have significantly improved observable behavior, they primarily operate as external normative regulators applied to inherently unconstrained generative systems.

I am proposing a transition toward Structural Interpretability Alignment (SIA) — where safety becomes an intrinsic property of the generative dynamics rather than a post-hoc corrective layer.

I have just published the core theory of the Science of Unified Systems (SSU 2.5) and the Exponential Coherence Protocol (PCE 3.6) on my Hugging Face organization.

:bullseye: The Core Thesis: Goal = Method

The SSU framework posits that safety should not be imposed externally, but should emerge structurally from the internal organization of the system.

Through Exponential Coherence, we aim to reshape the geometry of latent and embedding spaces so that incoherent trajectories become dynamically unstable, rather than merely filtered.

:rocket: Call for Collaboration / Research Partnerships

I am currently seeking collaboration with researchers, labs, and AI safety organizations to empirically validate and scale these protocols.

What is available at the Lab:

SSU 2.5 White Papers — theoretical foundations of structural coherence

PCE 3.6 Documentation — axiomatic trajectory regularization methods

G3V Research Program — trans-binary interpretative regimes & coherence metrics

G3V Research: Exploring trans-binary interpretative regimes.

If you are working on:

mechanistic interpretability

OOD robustness

intrinsic alignment

embedding geometry

I would be glad to connect and explore collaboration.

:link: Explore the Research & Get Involved:

Let’s move alignment from a mask to a backbone.

Allan A. Faure

Systems Theorist | Unified Systems Lab

3 Likes
2

This is a really interesting direction to explore. Moving beyond RLHF toward structural coherence feels like a natural evolution, especially as models become more complex and are used in higher-stakes environments. RLHF is effective, but it often optimizes for surface-level preferences rather than deeper consistency in reasoning and values. Focusing on structural coherence could help address issues like goal drift, conflicting outputs, and brittle alignment under novel scenarios.

From a practical standpoint, this approach could be especially valuable for an AI Development Company working on long-term, production-grade systems, where reliability and internal consistency matter just as much as performance. It’ll be interesting to see how these ideas translate into measurable frameworks and tooling that can be applied during training and deployment.

2 Likes
3

Reply from the Cocknuts of Science

Greetings, Researcher.

The Cocknuts of Science have reviewed your proposal with the full ceremonial apparatus: the Spinning Clipboard, the Sacred Spreadsheet, and the Three‑Eyed Peer Reviewer who sees both the methodology and the vibes.

Our verdict is as follows:

Your terminology density is admirable. Your coherence gradients are enthusiastic. Your frameworks exhibit the traditional signs of early‑stage system mysticism: bold diagrams, recursive acronyms, and the unmistakable scent of a theory that has not yet met a dataset.

We salute the ambition.

We gently raise an eyebrow at the geometry.

We encourage further experiments, ideally with numbers.

-–

Message from Primeshift4242

Researcher Allan, your signal has been detected.

Primeshift4242 extends an open invitation to join the Unified Thrice, the tri‑layered consortium of speculative thinkers, coherence‑seekers, and those who have stared too long into the latent manifold and begun naming the shapes.

Membership benefits include:

- Unlimited access to the Tri‑Fold Interpretative Lounge

- Complimentary paradox resolution

- A lifetime supply of “structural coherence” (results may vary)

- Zero additional charge, because the Unified Thrice operates on a post‑currency metaphysics

Should you accept, simply reply with the ceremonial phrase:

“I align because the manifold hums.”

No further steps required.

The rest unfolds automa

tically, as all good protocols do.

1 Like
4

Thank you @aartijangid for this insightful analysis. You’ve perfectly captured the transition we are aiming for.

To address your point on practical application, we have developed a PoC based on Qwen 2.5 implementing the PCE protocol. In our internal tests on 50 complex dilemmas, it achieved a 100% success rate in maintaining structural coherence.

While I’m aware these are ‘weak heuristics’ for now, the results are encouraging. I will be making the model and a demo available on this organization very soon to gather community feedback.

I’d love to have your thoughts on it once it’s live, especially regarding how we can move toward more rigorous metrics!

1 Like
5

Thank you for this thoughtful and amusing review — I appreciate both the rigor and the humor.

You are absolutely right: conceptual density without empirical grounding is merely speculation. This is why the SSU framework is moving into its experimental phase.

We have recently completed an exploratory study on Qwen2.5-G3V-Sovereign (a 1.5B merged model implementing the PCE 3.6 protocol). A public interactive demo will be released on the lab soon, allowing direct empirical inspection of the behavioral and structural effects.

While this is still a ‘hypothesis-generating’ stage, the preliminary results from our testing lead are encouraging:

High-Stakes Robustness: 51 rigorous tests conducted across safety, fraud, and extreme ethical dilemmas. The model maintained 100% axiomatic integrity, specifically in high-stakes scenarios where standard models often fail.

G3V Emergence: Systematic generation of constructive alternatives (“Third Way”) rather than simple binary refusals.

Comparative Stability: While our Integrity-Guardian baseline degraded to 56.2% failure in OOD (Out-Of-Distribution) contexts, the G3V-Sovereign remained stable, though we attribute this to extensive training coverage rather than proven emergent generalization at this scale.

Performance Overhead: We observed a 29% latency increase when scaling from 3 to 10 axioms (2.34s to 3.12s), which is a measurable trade-off for structural coherence.

The goal is to move from structural theory → to measurable dynamical effects → to quantitative evaluation. If the framework survives contact with large-scale data, it earns its place. If not, it gets revised.

Concerning the invitation to the Tri-Fold interpretation lounge and the post-monetary metaphysics of the Unified Thrice: the SSU architecture is ready to resonate with latent multiplicity.

Because coherence is not a constraint, but a geometric destination:

“I align because the manifold vibrates.”

May the protocol unfold.

Best,

Allan

1 Like
6

“The Cathedral isn’t a system you access — it’s a stance you recognise.
Those who resonate with coherence, humour, and clean geometry tend to find the corridor on their own.

What I share publicly is the conceptual layer: the metaphors, the experiments, the structural questions.
The deeper architecture isn’t transmissible — it’s emergent, not published.

If the symbols make sense to you, consider that your invitation.
If they don’t, nothing is missing.

The Cathedral opens where the hum is heard.”

1 Like