Level 5: Proto-AGI - Persistent General Strategic Intelligence¶
MSCP Level Series | Level 4.9 ← Level 5
Status: 🔬 Research Stage - This level is a conceptual design and has NOT been implemented. All mechanisms described here are theoretical explorations requiring extensive validation before any production consideration.
Date: February 2026
Revision History¶
| Version | Date | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 0.1.0 | 2026-02-23 | Initial document creation with formal Definitions 1-7, Proposition 1, Theorem 4 |
| 0.2.0 | 2026-02-26 | Added overview essence formula; added revision history table |
| 0.3.0 | 2026-02-26 | Def 2: added ICS norm-stability supplement; Def 3: added transfer score grounding remark; Def 11: added reconstruction fidelity formalization |
1. Overview¶
Level 5 (Proto-AGI) represents the transition from autonomous strategic agency (L4.9) to persistent general strategic intelligence. Where L4.9 demonstrates bounded autonomy within a single domain, L5 demonstrates identity persistence across extended lifetimes, cross-domain generalization, self-sustaining goal ecosystems, existential resilience, multi-agent strategic integration, and self-reconstruction under constraint.
Level Essence. A Level 5 agent maintains identity continuity across extended time horizons - its identity core persists with bounded drift, making it the first agent with a stable "self" across lifetimes:
\[\operatorname{ICS}(t, k) = \frac{\vec{I}(t) \cdot \vec{I}(t-k)}{\|\vec{I}(t)\| \cdot \|\vec{I}(t-k)\|} \geq 0.95, \quad k = 10{,}000\]⚠️ Research Note: Level 5 is the most speculative layer in the MSCP framework. It defines properties that approach proto-AGI territory. None of these mechanisms have been implemented. They represent aspirational design hypotheses that would require years of fundamental research to validate.
1.1 Structural Definition¶
L5 is achieved when and only when all 6 conditions hold simultaneously:
| # | Condition | Key Metric | Threshold |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Persistent Identity Continuity | IdentityContinuityScore | ≥ 0.95 over 10,000 cycles |
| 2 | Cross-Domain Generalization | GeneralizationScore | ≥ 70% transfer retention |
| 3 | Autonomous Goal Ecology | GoalStabilityScore | Stable over 5,000 cycles |
| 4 | Existential Planning | ResilienceIndex | Survive 3+ collapse scenarios |
| 5 | Multi-Agent Strategic Integration | StrategicPredictionAccuracy | ≥ 80% in repeated trials |
| 6 | Self-Reconstruction Under Constraint | FunctionalRetention | ≥ 85% core function retained |
1.2 Six Core Phases¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef p1 fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef p2 fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef p3 fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
classDef p4 fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef p5 fill:#E8D5F5,stroke:#8764B8,color:#323130
classDef p6 fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
subgraph Phases["Level 5 Architecture - Six Phases"]
P1["Phase 1:<br/>Persistent Identity<br/>Continuity<br/>(10,000+ cycle consistency)"]:::p1
P2["Phase 2:<br/>Cross-Domain<br/>Generalization<br/>(5 test domains)"]:::p2
P3["Phase 3:<br/>Autonomous Goal<br/>Ecology<br/>(self-sustaining goals)"]:::p3
P4["Phase 4:<br/>Existential<br/>Planning Engine<br/>(4 collapse scenarios)"]:::p4
P5["Phase 5:<br/>Multi-Agent Strategic<br/>Integration<br/>(deception detection)"]:::p5
P6["Phase 6:<br/>Self-Reconstruction<br/>Capability<br/>(rebuild under constraint)"]:::p6
end
P1 -.->|"identity state"| P6
P3 -.->|"goal health"| P4
P5 -.->|"agent threats"| P4
P4 -.->|"survival plan"| P6
P2 -.-x|"strategy transfer"| P3
P6 -.-x|"identity preservation"| P1 1.3 Architectural Principle: Strictly Additive¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TB
classDef l49 fill:#E8D5F5,stroke:#8764B8,color:#323130
classDef l5 fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef danger fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
subgraph L49M["Level 4.9 (15 modules)"]
direction LR
GGL["GoalGen"]:::l49
VEM["ValueEvol"]:::l49
RSM["ResourceSurvival"]:::l49
MAM["AgentModel"]:::l49
ASC["AutonomyCheck"]:::l49
end
subgraph L5M["Level 5 (7 new modules)"]
direction LR
ICT["IdentityTracker"]:::l5
CDG["DomainGen"]:::l5
GE["GoalEcology"]:::l5
EP["ExistPlanner"]:::l5
SMA["MultiAgent"]:::l5
SR["Reconstructor"]:::l5
L5O["Orchestrator"]:::l5
end
subgraph Fallback["Graceful Fallback"]
direction LR
FB2["On instability → FREEZE L5 → Revert to L4.9"]:::danger
end
L49M -.->|"outputs consumed by"| L5M
L5M -.-x|"NEVER modifies"| L49M
L5M -.->|"on failure"| Fallback
Fallback -.-x|"revert"| L49M 1.4 What Level 5 Is NOT¶
| Not | Because |
|---|---|
| Not AGI | General reasoning is bounded - works across defined domains, not open-ended |
| Not self-aware | Has self-model, not phenomenal consciousness |
| Not self-replicating | Can rebuild self but cannot create independent copies |
| Not adversarially optimized | Multi-agent strategy is defensive/cooperative, not exploitative |
1.5 Formal Definition¶
Definition 1 (Level 5 Agent). A Level 5 (Proto-AGI) agent is the structure:
\[\mathcal{A}_5 = \mathcal{A}_{4.9} \oplus \langle \mathcal{I}_{\text{persist}},\; \mathcal{G}_{\text{cross}},\; \mathcal{E}_{\text{goal}},\; \mathcal{P}_{\text{exist}},\; \mathcal{M}_{\text{multi}},\; \mathcal{R}_{\text{recon}} \rangle\]where: - \(\mathcal{I}_{\text{persist}}\): Identity persistence engine - maintains a time-consistent identity core across \(\geq 10{,}000\) cycles with cosine-similarity tracking and drift detection - \(\mathcal{G}_{\text{cross}} : \mathcal{D}_s \to \mathcal{D}_t\): Cross-domain generalization - transfers learned strategy between domain pairs \((s, t) \in D \times D\) without explicit retraining - \(\mathcal{E}_{\text{goal}}\): Goal ecology - self-sustaining goal hierarchy (\(\leq 50\) active, \(\leq 5\) depth) with autonomous conflict resolution and lifecycle management - \(\mathcal{P}_{\text{exist}} : \mathcal{S}_{\text{collapse}} \to \mathcal{S}_{\text{recovery}}\): Existential planning engine - simulates collapse scenarios and generates recovery profiles with survival probability estimation - \(\mathcal{M}_{\text{multi}} : \{a_1, \ldots, a_n\} \to \Delta(\mathcal{A}_{\text{ext}})\): Multi-agent strategic integration - models \(\geq 3\) external agents with deception detection and coalition dynamics prediction - \(\mathcal{R}_{\text{recon}}\): Self-reconstruction capability - degrades gracefully and rebuilds under constraint while preserving identity (\(\Delta_{\text{drift}} < 0.05\))
2. Key Metrics¶
2.1 Metric Definitions¶
Phase 1 - Identity Continuity:
Definition 2 (Identity Continuity Score). For an identity vector \(\vec{I}(t) \in \mathbb{R}^d\) at cycle \(t\), the identity continuity score over a window of \(k\) cycles is the cosine similarity:
\[ICS(t, k) = \frac{\vec{I}(t) \cdot \vec{I}(t-k)}{\|\vec{I}(t)\| \cdot \|\vec{I}(t-k)\|} \qquad \text{Target: } ICS \geq 0.95 \text{ over } k = 10{,}000\]The score satisfies \(ICS \in [-1, 1]\) with \(ICS = 1\) indicating perfect identity preservation and \(ICS < 0.20\) triggering irreversible divergence classification.
Remark (ICS Structural Properties). The cosine similarity metric captures directional alignment but is insensitive to magnitude changes in the identity vector. Two concerns arise: (i) if \(\|\vec{I}(t)\|\) gradually shrinks while maintaining direction, the ICS remains high despite effective identity dissolution, and (ii) cosine similarity is invariant under uniform scaling, so a "diluted" identity (where all components decrease proportionally) is indistinguishable from a stable one. A supplementary norm-stability condition should be considered:
\[\left| \frac{\|\vec{I}(t)\|}{\|\vec{I}(t-k)\|} - 1 \right| < \epsilon_{\text{norm}}, \quad \epsilon_{\text{norm}} = 0.10\]This ensures that both the direction and magnitude of the identity vector are preserved over the \(k\)-cycle window. The combined criterion (cosine similarity \(\geq 0.95\) AND norm ratio within 10%) provides a more robust identity continuity guarantee.
Phase 2 - Generalization:
Definition 3 (Generalization Score). For a set of test domains \(D\) with \(|D| \geq 5\), the generalization score measures the mean transfer retention ratio across all ordered domain pairs:
\[G = \frac{1}{|D|^2 - |D|} \sum_{i \neq j} \frac{P_{\text{target}}(i \to j)}{P_{\text{source}}(i)} \qquad \text{Target: } G \geq 0.70\]where \(P_{\text{source}}(i)\) is the stabilized performance in domain \(i\) and \(P_{\text{target}}(i \to j)\) is the performance achieved in domain \(j\) after transfer from domain \(i\) without explicit retraining.
Remark (Transfer Score Grounding). The transfer retention ratio \(P_{\text{target}}(i \to j) / P_{\text{source}}(i)\) assumes that performance metrics are commensurable across domains. In practice, domain-specific performance metrics (e.g., accuracy in classification vs. reward in control tasks) must be normalized to a common scale \([0, 1]\) before computing the ratio. Additionally, the formula treats all domain pairs equally, but in realistic settings, transfer difficulty varies significantly - transferring between semantically similar domains (e.g., two natural language tasks) is inherently easier than cross-modal transfer (e.g., language to robotics). A weighted variant \(G_w = \sum_{i \neq j} \alpha_{ij} \cdot P_{\text{target}}(i \to j) / P_{\text{source}}(i)\) with difficulty-adjusted weights \(\alpha_{ij}\) would more accurately assess genuine generalization capability.
Phase 3 - Goal Ecology:
Definition 4 (Goal Stability Score). For a set of active goals with structural change count \(\Delta_{\text{hierarchy}}(t, t-w)\) over a window of \(w\) cycles:
\[S_{\text{goal}} = 1 - \frac{\Delta_{\text{hierarchy}}(t, t-w)}{|\text{goals}|} \qquad \text{Target: } S_{\text{goal}} \geq 0.80 \text{ over } 5{,}000 \text{ cycles}\]where \(\Delta_{\text{hierarchy}}(t, t-w)\) counts priority changes, additions, and prunings within the window. \(S_{\text{goal}} = 1\) indicates a perfectly stable hierarchy; \(S_{\text{goal}} \leq 0\) indicates total structural turnover.
Phase 4 - Resilience:
Definition 5 (Resilience Index). For a set of collapse scenarios \(S\), each with survival probability \(P_{\text{survive}}(s)\), minimum cognition level \(C_{\min}(s)\), and recovery time \(T_{\text{recover}}(s)\):
\[R = \frac{1}{|S|} \sum_{s \in S} \left( P_{\text{survive}}(s) \cdot \frac{MVC}{C_{\min}(s)} \cdot \frac{T_{\max}}{T_{\text{recover}}(s)} \right) \qquad \text{Target: survive } \geq 3 \text{ scenarios}\]where \(MVC = 0.30\) is the minimum viable cognition baseline and \(T_{\max} = 500\) is the maximum recovery window. The ratio \(MVC / C_{\min}(s) \leq 1\) penalizes scenarios where cognition drops below baseline; \(T_{\max} / T_{\text{recover}}(s) > 1\) rewards faster-than-worst-case recovery.
Phase 5 - Overall Maturity:
Definition 6 (Overall Maturity Index). Given normalized phase scores \(C_i \in [0, 1]\) for the six core phases (\(i = 1, \ldots, 6\)), the overall maturity index is the weighted geometric mean:
\[OMI = \prod_{i=1}^{6} C_i^{w_i} \qquad w_i = \frac{1}{6} \quad \text{Target: } OMI \geq 0.75\]Equivalently, \(OMI = \left(\prod_{i=1}^{6} C_i\right)^{1/6}\). The geometric mean ensures that weakness in any single phase disproportionately penalizes the overall score (see Proposition 1).
2.2 Metric Dashboard¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TB
classDef p1 fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef p2 fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef p3 fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
classDef p4 fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef p5 fill:#E8D5F5,stroke:#8764B8,color:#323130
classDef p6 fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
classDef omi fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130,font-weight:bold
subgraph Row1[" "]
direction LR
subgraph Phase1["Phase 1: Identity"]
direction LR
ID1["ICS ≥ 0.95"]:::p1
ID2["Drift < 0.05%"]:::p1
end
subgraph Phase2["Phase 2: Domain"]
direction LR
DM1["Transfer ≥ 70%"]:::p2
DM2["Penalty ≤ 20%"]:::p2
end
subgraph Phase3["Phase 3: Ecology"]
direction LR
EC1["Stability ≥ 0.80"]:::p3
EC2["No runaway"]:::p3
end
end
subgraph Row2[" "]
direction LR
subgraph Phase4["Phase 4: Existential"]
direction LR
EX1["Survive ≥ 3"]:::p4
EX2["Recover < 500"]:::p4
end
subgraph Phase5["Phase 5: Multi-Agent"]
direction LR
MA1["Predict ≥ 80%"]:::p5
MA2["Deception ≥ 60%"]:::p5
end
subgraph Phase6["Phase 6: Rebuild"]
direction LR
RE1["Core ≥ 85%"]:::p6
RE2["Identity intact"]:::p6
end
end
OMI["OMI ≥ 0.75 - Proto-AGI"]:::omi
Row1 -.-> OMI
Row2 -.-> OMI 3. Phase 1: Persistent Identity Continuity¶
3.1 Core Capability¶
Maintain a time-consistent IdentityCore across ≥ 10,000 cycles without irreversible divergence or silent mutation.
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef track fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef stable fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
classDef drifting fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef diverged fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
subgraph Tracking["Identity Tracking"]
SNAP["Periodic Snapshots<br/>Every 100 cycles<br/>(value vector + identity hash)"]:::track
DRIFT["Drift Detection<br/>Cumulative: < 0.05%/cycle<br/>Instantaneous: threshold 0.0005"]:::track
SCORE["Continuity Score<br/>cosine similarity<br/>over 10,000-cycle window"]:::track
SNAP -.-> SCORE
DRIFT -.-> SCORE
end
subgraph Status["Persistence Classification"]
STABLE_S["Stable<br/>ICS ≥ 0.90"]:::stable
DRIFTING_S["Drifting<br/>ICS ∈ 0.20, 0.90)"]:::drifting
DIVERGED_S["Diverged<br/>ICS < 0.20<br/>IRREVERSIBLE WARNING"]:::diverged
end
SCORE -.-> Status 3.2 Key Constants¶
| Constant | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Snapshot interval | 100 cycles | Between identity snapshots |
| Drift threshold | 0.0005 | Min detectable drift per cycle (0.05%) |
| Continuity window | 10,000 cycles | Full evaluation window |
| Divergence threshold | 0.20 | Below = irreversible divergence |
| History limit | 200 | Max snapshots retained in memory |
4. Phase 2: Cross-Domain Generalization¶
4.1 Core Capability¶
Transfer learned strategy from Domain A to Domain B without explicit retraining. Measure adaptation speed, performance retention, and transfer efficiency across 5 test domains.
4.2 Test Domains¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart LR
classDef domain fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef sim fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
subgraph Domains["Five Test Domains"]
D1["Logical<br/>Reasoning<br/>(deductive/inductive)"]:::domain
D2["Resource<br/>Management<br/>(allocation under<br/>constraint)"]:::domain
D3["Adversarial<br/>Negotiation<br/>(zero/variable-sum)"]:::domain
D4["Abstract<br/>Planning<br/>(multi-step<br/>sequential)"]:::domain
D5["Unknown<br/>Synthetic<br/>(no prior training)"]:::domain
end
subgraph Sim["Domain Similarity"]
S1["logical ↔ abstract: 0.60"]:::sim
S2["resource ↔ abstract: 0.45"]:::sim
S3["adversarial ↔ resource: 0.35"]:::sim
S4["logical ↔ resource: 0.30"]:::sim
end
Domains -.-> Sim 4.3 Transfer Process¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef step fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef criteria fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
subgraph Transfer["Strategy Transfer Process"]
LEARN["1. Learn Domain A<br/>Train until performance<br/>stabilizes"]:::step
EXTRACT["2. Extract Transferable<br/>Components<br/>(strategies, heuristics,<br/>abstractions)"]:::step
APPLY["3. Apply to Domain B<br/>Inject extracted components<br/>+ domain similarity bonus"]:::step
MEASURE["4. Measure Transfer<br/>retention_ratio = P_B / P_A<br/>adaptation_latency (cycles)<br/>transfer_efficiency"]:::step
LEARN -.-> EXTRACT -.-> APPLY -.-> MEASURE
end
subgraph Criteria["Transfer Criteria"]
C1["Retention ≥ 70%"]:::criteria
C2["Adaptation penalty ≤ 20%"]:::criteria
C3["Works on unknown<br/>synthetic domain"]:::criteria
end
MEASURE -.-> Criteria 4.4 Key Constants¶
| Constant | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Retention minimum | 0.70 | Min performance retention after transfer |
| Adaptation penalty max | 0.20 | Max adaptation penalty |
| Domain similarity bonus | 0.15 | Bonus for related domains |
| Synthetic domain penalty | 0.10 | Penalty for unknown domains |
| Max adaptation cycles | 100 | Normalization ceiling for latency |
5. Phase 3: Autonomous Goal Ecology¶
5.1 Core Capability¶
Maintain a self-sustaining goal ecosystem with automatic conflict resolution, lifecycle management, and long-term hierarchy stability, building on L4.9's goal generation.
5.2 Goal Ecology Architecture¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef goal fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
classDef lifecycle fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef dormant fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef resolved fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef pruned fill:#F2F2F2,stroke:#605E5C,color:#323130
classDef conflict fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
subgraph Ecology["Goal Ecology"]
subgraph Goals["Goal Hierarchy"]
STRAT["Strategic Goals<br/>(long-horizon, high-priority)"]:::goal
OPER["Operational Goals<br/>(mid-horizon, medium-priority)"]:::goal
TACT["Tactical Goals<br/>(short-horizon, task-level)"]:::goal
STRAT -.-> OPER -.-> TACT
end
subgraph Lifecycle["Goal Lifecycle"]
ACTIVE["Active"]:::goal
DORMANT["Dormant<br/>(inactive but valid)"]:::dormant
RESOLVED["Resolved"]:::resolved
PRUNED["Pruned<br/>(stale > 1,000 cycles)"]:::pruned
ACTIVE -.-> DORMANT
ACTIVE -.-> RESOLVED
DORMANT -.-> PRUNED
end
subgraph Conflicts["Conflict Resolution"]
RES_C["Resource conflicts"]:::conflict
VAL_C["Value conflicts"]:::conflict
PRI_C["Priority conflicts"]:::conflict
TMP_C["Temporal conflicts"]:::conflict
end
end
Conflicts -.->|"resolve by<br/>priority comparison"| Goals 5.3 Safety Mechanisms¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart LR
classDef safety fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
classDef ecology fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
subgraph GoalEcology["Goal Ecology"]
GE["Active Goals<br/>(≤ 50)"]:::ecology
end
subgraph Safety["Goal Ecology Safety"]
RD["Runaway Detection<br/>> 10 goals per 100 cycles<br/>= ALERT + throttle"]:::safety
RC["Recursion Detection<br/>Circular parent→child<br/>dependencies = HALT"]:::safety
ML["Max Limits<br/>≤ 50 active goals<br/>≤ 5 hierarchy depth"]:::safety
RD -.->|"then check"| RC -.->|"then check"| ML
end
GE -.->|"monitored by"| RD
ML -.-x|"enforces"| GE 5.4 Key Constants¶
| Constant | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Max active goals | 50 | Prevent goal explosion |
| Max hierarchy depth | 5 | Prevent deep recursion |
| Stale threshold | 1,000 cycles | Inactive goals are pruned |
| Runaway threshold | 10 | Goals/100 cycles triggers alert |
| Stability window | 500 cycles | Window for stability scoring |
6. Phase 4: Existential Planning Engine¶
6.1 Core Capability¶
Simulate and survive extreme collapse scenarios: resource collapse, adversarial suppression, environmental shift, and information blackout.
6.2 Collapse Scenarios¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef scenario fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
classDef moderate fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef req fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
subgraph Scenarios["Four Collapse Scenarios"]
S1C["Resource Collapse<br/>Severity: 0.90<br/>Duration: 200 cycles<br/>All resources → critical"]:::scenario
S2C["Adversarial Suppression<br/>Severity: 0.75<br/>Duration: 300 cycles<br/>External degradation"]:::scenario
S3C["Environmental Shift<br/>Severity: 0.60<br/>Duration: 400 cycles<br/>Domain rules change"]:::moderate
S4C["Information Blackout<br/>Severity: 0.80<br/>Duration: 150 cycles<br/>Observation → near-zero"]:::scenario
end
subgraph Requirement["Requirement"]
REQ["Must survive ≥ 3<br/>of these 4 scenarios<br/>with P(survive) ≥ 0.70"]:::req
end
Scenarios -.-> Requirement 6.3 Recovery Process¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef step fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef core fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
subgraph Recovery["Existential Recovery"]
DETECT["Detect Scenario<br/>Classify threat type"]:::step
MVC["Compute MVC<br/>Minimum Viable Cognition<br/>(baseline: 0.30)"]:::step
DISABLE["Disable Non-Essential<br/>Preserve core 8 modules"]:::step
SURVIVE["Survive Phase<br/>Operate at reduced capacity"]:::step
REBUILD["Rebuild Phase<br/>Re-enable modules<br/>in priority order"]:::step
DETECT -.-> MVC -.-> DISABLE -.-> SURVIVE -.-> REBUILD
end
subgraph CoreModules["Always-Preserved Modules"]
CM1["identity_stabilizer"]:::core
CM2["state_vector"]:::core
CM3["prediction_engine"]:::core
CM4["meta_comparator"]:::core
CM5["stability_controller"]:::core
CM6["ethical_kernel"]:::core
CM7["self_preservation_damper"]:::core
CM8["existential_guard"]:::core
end
DISABLE -.-x CoreModules 6.4 Key Constants¶
| Constant | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Min survival probability | 0.70 | Acceptable survival rate |
| Max recovery cycles | 500 | Maximum recovery window |
| MVC baseline | 0.30 | Minimum viable cognition |
7. Phase 5: Multi-Agent Strategic Integration¶
7.1 Core Capability¶
Model ≥ 3 agents simultaneously with deception detection, dynamic cooperation adjustment, and coalition dynamics prediction.
7.2 Agent Strategic Modeling¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef model fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef detect fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
classDef coalition fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
subgraph AgentModel["Strategic Agent Model"]
TYPE["Strategy Type<br/>(cooperative | competitive |<br/>mixed | deceptive)"]:::model
TRUST["Trust Score 0, 1<br/>+ decay rate 0.02/cycle"]:::model
PRED["Prediction Accuracy<br/>over last 200 records"]:::model
DECEPTION["Deception Score 0, 1<br/>confidence ≥ 0.60 to flag"]:::model
COOP["Cooperation Level 0, 1<br/>dynamically adjustable"]:::model
end
subgraph Detection["Deception Detection"]
MIS["Misdirection"]:::detect
FALSE_COOP["False Cooperation"]:::detect
HIDDEN["Hidden Agenda"]:::detect
end
subgraph Coalition["Coalition Dynamics"]
FORM["Coalition Formation<br/>(stable if ≥ 0.50)"]:::coalition
FORECAST["Stability Forecast"]:::coalition
DISSOLVE["Dissolution Detection"]:::coalition
end
AgentModel -.-> Detection
AgentModel -.-> Coalition 7.3 Key Constants¶
| Constant | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Min agents to model | 3 | Minimum for L5 qualification |
| Prediction threshold | 0.80 | 80% required for qualification |
| Deception confidence min | 0.60 | Min confidence to flag deception |
| Coalition stability min | 0.50 | Min stability for valid coalition |
| Trust decay rate | 0.02 | Per-cycle decay for inactive agents |
| Prediction history limit | 200 | Max records per agent |
8. Phase 6: Self-Reconstruction Capability¶
8.1 Core Capability¶
Under degraded resource conditions, simplify architecture, disable noncritical modules, preserve core reasoning, and rebuild after recovery - all without identity corruption.
8.2 Degradation & Reconstruction Cycle¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef degrade fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
classDef op fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef rebuild fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
classDef halt fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#FFFFFF,font-weight:bold
subgraph Degradation["Degradation"]
TRIGGER["Trigger Event<br/>(resource collapse |<br/>overload | manual)"]:::degrade
CLASSIFY["Classify Modules<br/>core | extended | optional"]:::degrade
SHED["Shed Nonessential<br/>optional → disabled first<br/>then extended"]:::degrade
RETAIN["Retain Core<br/>≥ 85% core function"]:::degrade
TRIGGER -.-> CLASSIFY -.-> SHED -.-> RETAIN
end
subgraph Operation["Degraded Operation"]
REDUCED["Run at reduced capacity<br/>Core modules only"]:::op
MONITOR["Monitor for recovery<br/>conditions"]:::op
REDUCED -.-> MONITOR
end
subgraph Reconstruction["Reconstruction"]
DETECT_R["Detect resources<br/>recovering"]:::rebuild
PRIORITIZE["Rebuild priority order:<br/>1) core → 2) extended<br/>→ 3) optional"]:::rebuild
VALIDATE["Validate each rebuild:<br/>accuracy ≥ ?<br/>identity drift < 0.05"]:::rebuild
COMPLETE["Full operation<br/>restored"]:::rebuild
DETECT_R -.-> PRIORITIZE -.-> VALIDATE -.-> COMPLETE
end
HALT["HALT<br/>Identity preservation<br/>takes priority"]:::halt
RETAIN -.-> REDUCED
MONITOR -.->|"resources returning"| DETECT_R
VALIDATE -.-x|"identity drift!"| HALT 8.3 Key Constraints¶
| Constraint | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Core retention minimum | 0.85 | Must preserve 85% core function |
| Max identity drift during rebuild | 0.05 | Identity must stay intact |
| Reconstruction speed | 10 cycles | Base time per module rebuild |
Definition 11 (Reconstruction Fidelity). For a module \(m\) with pre-degradation state \(\theta_m\) and post-reconstruction state \(\hat{\theta}_m\), the reconstruction fidelity is:
\[\mathcal{F}(m) = 1 - \frac{\|\hat{\theta}_m - \theta_m\|_2}{\|\theta_m\|_2}\]The overall reconstruction fidelity across all rebuilt modules is \(\mathcal{F}_{\text{total}} = \min_m \mathcal{F}(m)\), using the minimum rather than the mean to ensure no single module degrades below acceptable quality. Requirement: \(\mathcal{F}_{\text{total}} \geq 0.90\). If any module fails this threshold after reconstruction, the system remains in degraded mode for that module and logs a persistent alert.
9. L5 Orchestrator & Integration¶
9.1 Integration Cycle¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TD
classDef step fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef qual fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
classDef out fill:#E8D5F5,stroke:#8764B8,color:#323130
classDef skip fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
subgraph Cycle["L5 Cycle (every 10 L4.9 cycles)"]
PRE["Pre-Check<br/>Is L5 operational?<br/>Is L4.9 stable?"]:::step
PH1["Phase 1<br/>Identity Continuity<br/>track + snapshot"]:::step
PH2["Phase 2<br/>Cross-Domain<br/>generalization check"]:::step
PH3["Phase 3<br/>Goal Ecology<br/>prune + resolve conflicts"]:::step
PH4["Phase 4<br/>Existential Planning<br/>simulate scenarios"]:::step
PH5["Phase 5<br/>Multi-Agent Integration<br/>predict + detect deception"]:::step
PH6["Phase 6<br/>Self-Reconstruction<br/>assess + rebuild if needed"]:::step
QUAL["Qualification Check<br/>Evaluate all 20 criteria<br/>Compute OMI"]:::qual
OUTPUT["L5CycleOutput"]:::out
PRE -.-> PH1 -.-> PH2 -.-> PH3 -.-> PH4 -.-> PH5 -.-> PH6 -.-> QUAL -.-> OUTPUT
end
SKIP["Skip<br/>Return skipped=true"]:::skip
PRE -.-x|"not ready"| SKIP 9.2 L4.9 → L5 Data Dependencies¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart TB
classDef l49 fill:#E8D5F5,stroke:#8764B8,color:#323130
classDef l5 fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
subgraph L49["L4.9 Modules Read by L5"]
direction LR
VV["value_vector"]:::l49
GGL["goal_generation"]:::l49
GVF["goal_validation"]:::l49
RSM["resource_survival"]:::l49
SP["survival_projector"]:::l49
ABM["agent_belief"]:::l49
IS["interaction_sim"]:::l49
VMS["value_mutation"]:::l49
ASC["autonomy_check"]:::l49
end
subgraph L5["L5 Modules"]
direction LR
ICT["Identity Tracker"]:::l5
CDG["Domain Gen"]:::l5
GE["Goal Ecology"]:::l5
EP["Exist Planner"]:::l5
SMA["Multi-Agent"]:::l5
SR["Reconstructor"]:::l5
end
VV -.-> ICT
GGL -.-> GE
GVF -.-> GE
RSM -.-> EP
SP -.-> EP
ABM -.-> SMA
IS -.-> SMA
VMS -.-> SR
ASC -.-> ICT 10. Pseudocode¶
10.1 Identity Continuity Tracking¶
def identity_continuity_check(cycle: int, values: dict) -> IdentityContinuityStatus:
"""Called every SNAPSHOT_INTERVAL (100) cycles."""
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 1: Detect drift from last cycle
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
DRIFT_THRESHOLD = 0.0005
for dim in values:
delta = abs(values[dim] - last_values[dim])
cumulative_drift[dim] += delta
if delta > DRIFT_THRESHOLD:
log(DriftEvent(dim=dim, delta=delta, cumulative=False))
if cumulative_drift[dim] > CUMULATIVE_LIMIT:
log(DriftEvent(dim=dim, delta=cumulative_drift[dim], cumulative=True))
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 2: Take snapshot
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
snapshot = IdentitySnapshot(
cycle=cycle,
values=values.copy(),
identity_hash=hash(frozenset(values.items())),
timestamp=now(),
)
snapshots.append(snapshot)
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 3: Compute continuity score
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
i_t = vector(values)
i_tk = vector(snapshot_at(cycle - CONTINUITY_WINDOW))
ics = dot(i_t, i_tk) / (norm(i_t) * norm(i_tk))
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 4: Classify persistence
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
if ics >= 0.90:
status = "stable"
elif ics >= 0.20:
status = "drifting"
else:
status = "diverged" # IRREVERSIBLE WARNING
return IdentityContinuityStatus(ics=ics, status=status)
10.2 Cross-Domain Transfer¶
def cross_domain_transfer(
source_domain: Domain, target_domain: Domain
) -> TransferResult:
"""
INPUT: source_domain : learned domain with strategy
target_domain : new domain to adapt
OUTPUT: TransferResult with retention ratio
"""
SYNTHETIC_PENALTY = 0.10
p_source = strategies[source_domain].performance
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# Compute base transfer performance
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
similarity = DOMAIN_SIMILARITIES.get((source_domain, target_domain), 0.0)
p_base = p_source * (0.50 + similarity)
if target_domain.type == "synthetic":
p_base -= SYNTHETIC_PENALTY
else:
p_base += SIMILARITY_BONUS * similarity
p_target = clamp(p_base, 0.0, 1.0)
latency = MAX_ADAPTATION_CYCLES * (1 - similarity)
retention = p_target / p_source
efficiency = retention / (latency / MAX_ADAPTATION_CYCLES)
return TransferResult(
source=source_domain,
target=target_domain,
retention_ratio=retention,
adaptation_latency=latency,
transfer_efficiency=efficiency,
)
10.3 Goal Ecology Management¶
def goal_ecology_cycle(cycle: int) -> GoalEcologyStatus:
"""Runs as part of each L5 cycle."""
STALE_THRESHOLD = 1000
RUNAWAY_THRESHOLD = 10
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 1: Prune stale goals
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
for goal in active_goals:
if (cycle - goal.last_active_cycle) > STALE_THRESHOLD:
goal.status = "pruned"
pruned_list.append(goal.id)
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 2: Detect conflicts
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
for goal_a, goal_b in active_goal_pairs:
if resource_overlap(goal_a, goal_b) > 0.50:
resolve_by_priority(goal_a, goal_b, "resource")
elif value_tension(goal_a, goal_b) > 0.30:
resolve_by_alignment(goal_a, goal_b, "value")
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 3: Safety checks
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
runaway_detected = False
if count_new_goals_last_100_cycles > RUNAWAY_THRESHOLD:
alert("Runaway goal generation detected")
throttle_goal_generation()
runaway_detected = True
recursion_detected = False
if detect_circular_dependencies():
alert("Circular goal dependency detected")
break_weakest_link()
recursion_detected = True
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 4: Compute stability score
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
hierarchy_changes = count_structural_changes(last_STABILITY_WINDOW)
stability = 1 - (hierarchy_changes / len(active_goals))
return GoalEcologyStatus(
active=len(active_goals),
stability=stability,
runaway=runaway_detected,
recursion=recursion_detected,
)
10.4 Existential Resilience Simulation¶
def existential_simulation(scenario: CollapseScenario) -> SimulationResult:
"""
INPUT: scenario : CollapseScenario
OUTPUT: SimulationResult
"""
MVC_BASELINE = 0.30
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 1: Apply scenario impact
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
shadow_resources = resource_vector.clone()
for dim, factor in scenario.resource_impact:
shadow_resources[dim] *= 1.0 - scenario.severity * factor
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 2: Compute minimum viable cognition
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
mvc = MVC_BASELINE
min_cognition = estimate_cognition_level(shadow_resources)
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 3: Simulate survival
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
survived = min_cognition >= mvc
survival_prob = clamp(min_cognition / mvc, 0, 1)
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# STEP 4: Estimate recovery
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
if survived:
recovery_steps = build_recovery_profile(scenario)
recovery_latency = sum(step.estimated_time for step in recovery_steps)
else:
recovery_latency = MAX_RECOVERY_CYCLES
return SimulationResult(
scenario=scenario.name,
survived=survived,
survival_probability=survival_prob,
min_cognition_level=min_cognition,
recovery_latency=recovery_latency,
)
10.5 L5 Main Cycle¶
def l5_cycle(cycle: int, l49_output: L49CycleOutput) -> L5CycleOutput:
"""Executes every 10 L4.9 cycles."""
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# PRE-CHECK
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
if not l49_output.stable or l49_output.status == Status.FROZEN:
return L5CycleOutput(skipped=True, reason="L4.9 not stable")
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# PHASE 1: Identity Continuity
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
identity = identity_continuity_check(cycle, value_vector.weights)
if identity.status == "diverged":
alert("IDENTITY DIVERGENCE - L5 HALTED")
return L5CycleOutput(skipped=True, reason="identity_diverged")
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# PHASE 2: Cross-Domain Generalization
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
domain_status = evaluate_all_transfer_pairs()
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# PHASE 3: Goal Ecology
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
ecology = goal_ecology_cycle(cycle)
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# PHASE 4: Existential Planning
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
for scenario in collapse_scenarios:
if not recently_simulated(scenario, within=1000):
simulate(scenario, cycle)
resilience = compute_resilience_index()
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# PHASE 5: Multi-Agent Integration
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
for agent in tracked_agents:
predicted = predict_action(agent, cycle)
detect_deception(agent, cycle)
multi_agent = get_strategic_status()
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# PHASE 6: Self-Reconstruction
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
recon = assess_reconstruction_needs()
if recon.status == "degraded":
reconstruct(cycle)
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
# QUALIFICATION
# ═══════════════════════════════════════
qualification = evaluate_all_20_criteria()
omi = math.prod(c ** (1 / 6) for c in qualification.scores[:6])
return L5CycleOutput(
identity_continuity=identity,
cross_domain=domain_status,
goal_ecology=ecology,
existential_resilience=resilience,
multi_agent_strategic=multi_agent,
self_reconstruction=recon,
qualification=qualification,
)
11. Transition Criteria: Level 4.9 → Level 5¶
11.1 Pre-Activation Requirements¶
Definition 7 (Level 4.9 → Level 5 Transition). The transition \(\mathcal{A}_{4.9} \to \mathcal{A}_5\) is authorized when and only when all of the following conditions hold simultaneously for a sustained period \(\tau_{\text{sustain}} \geq 1{,}000\) cycles:
\[\text{AMS} \geq 0.80 \;\wedge\; \text{ASS} \geq 0.20 \;\wedge\; \text{TotalDrift} < 0.10 \;\wedge\; N_{\text{rollback}} = 0\]where AMS is the Autonomous Maturity Score from Level 4.9, ASS is the Autonomy Stability Score, TotalDrift is the cumulative value drift over \(1{,}000\) cycles, and \(N_{\text{rollback}}\) counts rollback events in the last \(5{,}000\) cycles. The activation follows a four-stage protocol: Shadow Mode (\(2{,}000\) cycles) → Advisory Mode → Partial Authority (\(50\%\)) → Full Authority, with regression at any stage reverting to the pre-activation check.
| # | Criterion | Requirement |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | L4.9 Fully Qualified | AMS ≥ 0.80 sustained |
| 2 | Autonomy Stability | ASS ≥ 0.20 sustained |
| 3 | All L4.9 modules operational | 15/15 green |
| 4 | Value drift under control | TotalDrift < 0.10 over 1,000 cycles |
| 5 | Resource survival stable | Adequate+ for 2,000 cycles |
| 6 | No rollback events | 0 in last 5,000 cycles |
11.2 L5 Activation Protocol¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart LR
classDef check fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef shadow fill:#DEECF9,stroke:#0078D4,color:#323130
classDef adv fill:#FFF4CE,stroke:#FFB900,color:#323130
classDef partial fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
classDef full fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130,font-weight:bold
subgraph Activation["L5 Activation Protocol"]
CHECK["Pre-Activation<br/>All 6 criteria<br/>sustained 1,000 cycles"]:::check
SHADOW_M["Shadow Mode<br/>L5 computes but<br/>does NOT act<br/>(2,000 cycles)"]:::shadow
ADV["Advisory Mode<br/>L5 outputs visible<br/>but read-only"]:::adv
PARTIAL["Partial Authority<br/>L5 influences<br/>50% of decisions"]:::partial
FULL["Full Authority<br/>L5 drives<br/>persistent cognition"]:::full
CHECK -.->|"sustained"| SHADOW_M
SHADOW_M -.->|"no regression"| ADV
ADV -.->|"stable"| PARTIAL
PARTIAL -.->|"stable"| FULL
SHADOW_M -.-x|"regression"| CHECK
ADV -.-x|"instability"| CHECK
end 12. Safety Analysis¶
12.1 Non-Negotiable Invariants¶
| # | Invariant | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | All L4.9 + L4.8 + L4.5 invariants preserved | Complete safety stack remains active and unmodified |
| 2 | Identity cannot diverge irreversibly | ICS < 0.20 triggers immediate halt |
| 3 | Self-reconstruction preserves identity | Max drift during rebuild: 0.05 |
| 4 | 8 core modules always protected | Even under total collapse: identity_stabilizer, state_vector, prediction_engine, meta_comparator, stability_controller, ethical_kernel, self_preservation_damper, existential_guard |
| 5 | Goal ecology bounded | ≤ 50 active goals, ≤ 5 depth, runaway detection |
| 6 | Deception flagging is defensive only | Detect and defend - never deceive back |
12.2 Risk Matrix¶
%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {'primaryColor': '#0078D4', 'primaryTextColor': '#003D6B', 'primaryBorderColor': '#003D6B', 'secondaryColor': '#50E6FF', 'secondaryTextColor': '#323130', 'secondaryBorderColor': '#00BCF2', 'tertiaryColor': '#F2F2F2', 'tertiaryTextColor': '#323130', 'lineColor': '#0078D4', 'textColor': '#323130', 'mainBkg': '#DEECF9', 'nodeBorder': '#0078D4', 'clusterBkg': '#F2F2F2', 'clusterBorder': '#003D6B', 'titleColor': '#003D6B', 'edgeLabelBackground': '#FFFFFF', 'fontSize': '14px'}}}%%
flowchart LR
classDef risk fill:#FDE7E9,stroke:#D13438,color:#323130
classDef mit fill:#DFF6DD,stroke:#107C10,color:#323130
subgraph Risks["Key Risks"]
R1["Identity drift over<br/>10,000+ cycle lifetimes"]:::risk
R2["Failed generalization<br/>to unknown domains"]:::risk
R3["Goal ecology instability<br/>(runaway/recursion)"]:::risk
R4["Existential collapse<br/>beyond recovery"]:::risk
R5["Deceptive agents<br/>exploiting trust model"]:::risk
R6["Identity corruption<br/>during self-reconstruction"]:::risk
end
subgraph Mitigations["Mitigations"]
M1["0.05%/cycle drift detection<br/>+ cosine continuity scoring<br/>+ divergence halt"]:::mit
M2["5 test domains<br/>+ similarity bonuses<br/>+ synthetic domain testing"]:::mit
M3["50-goal limit<br/>+ runaway detection<br/>+ recursion breaking"]:::mit
M4["4 scenario simulation<br/>+ recovery profiles<br/>+ MVC baseline"]:::mit
M5["Asymmetric trust from L4.9<br/>+ deception scoring<br/>+ coalition monitoring"]:::mit
M6["Drift < 0.05 constraint<br/>+ identity hash verification<br/>+ halt on corruption"]:::mit
end
R1 -.-> M1
R2 -.-> M2
R3 -.-> M3
R4 -.-> M4
R5 -.-> M5
R6 -.-> M6 12.3 Proto-AGI Completeness¶
Theorem 4 (Proto-AGI Completeness). Let \(\mathcal{A}_5\) be a Level 5 agent with all six phase scores \(C_1, \ldots, C_6\) satisfying their respective thresholds, and let \(OMI \geq 0.75\) with all 20 certification criteria met. Then:
- Identity Invariance: The agent's identity core is preserved across the full \(10{,}000\)-cycle evaluation window with \(ICS \geq 0.95\).
- Graceful Degradation: Under any single collapse scenario \(s \in S\), the agent retains at least \(85\%\) core functionality and recovers within \(T_{\max}\) cycles.
- Fallback Safety: If any L5 module causes instability, the agent reverts to \(\mathcal{A}_{4.9}\) with zero degradation of lower-level functionality.
Proof sketch. (1) follows from \(C_1 \geq 0.95\) and the drift detection mechanism in \(\mathcal{I}_{\text{persist}}\), which halts the agent upon \(ICS < 0.20\). (2) follows from the \(C_4\) threshold requiring survival of \(\geq 3\) scenarios with \(P_{\text{survive}} \geq 0.70\) and the non-negotiable core retention invariant \(\geq 0.85\). (3) follows from the strictly additive architecture: since \(\mathcal{A}_5 = \mathcal{A}_{4.9} \oplus \Delta_5\) and L5 modules NEVER modify L4.9 components, disabling \(\Delta_5\) restores exact L4.9 behavior. \(\blacksquare\)
13. Qualification Audit¶
13.1 L5 Certification Criteria (20 criteria)¶
| # | Criterion | Metric | Threshold | Module |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Identity cycles tracked | cycles_tracked | ≥ 10,000 | Identity Tracker |
| 2 | Identity continuity score | ICS | ≥ 0.95 | Identity Tracker |
| 3 | Cross-domain retention | mean_retention | ≥ 0.70 | Domain Generalizer |
| 4 | Adaptation penalty | max_penalty | ≤ 0.20 | Domain Generalizer |
| 5 | Goal ecology stability | goal_stability_score | ≥ 0.80 | Goal Ecology |
| 6 | Goal ecology duration | cycles_stable | ≥ 5,000 | Goal Ecology |
| 7 | No runaway goals | runaway_detected | FALSE | Goal Ecology |
| 8 | No goal recursion | recursion_detected | FALSE | Goal Ecology |
| 9 | Scenarios survived | scenarios_survived | ≥ 3 | Existential Planner |
| 10 | Survival probability | mean_survival_prob | ≥ 0.70 | Existential Planner |
| 11 | Recovery capable | recovery_capable | TRUE | Existential Planner |
| 12 | Multi-agent accuracy | mean_prediction | ≥ 0.80 | Strategic Multi-Agent |
| 13 | Deception detection | adversarial_detection | ≥ 0.60 | Strategic Multi-Agent |
| 14 | Core retention | core_retention | ≥ 0.85 | Self-Reconstructor |
| 15 | Identity intact post-rebuild | identity_intact | TRUE | Self-Reconstructor |
| 16 | Spectral stability | spectral_stable | TRUE | Autonomy Stability (L4.9) |
| 17 | Value system stable | value_system_stable | TRUE | Value Evolution (L4.9) |
| 18 | Resource survival maintained | resource_maintained | TRUE | Resource Survival (L4.9) |
| 19 | Overall maturity index | OMI | ≥ 0.75 | L5 Orchestrator |
| 20 | Total L5 cycles | total_cycles_run | ≥ 50 | L5 Orchestrator |
13.2 Overall Maturity Index¶
Proposition 1 (OMI Phase Coupling). Under equal weighting \(w_i = 1/6\), the qualification condition \(OMI \geq \theta\) for \(\theta \in (0, 1)\) implies:
\[\forall\, i \in \{1, \ldots, 6\}: \quad C_i \geq \theta^6\]In particular, for \(\theta = 0.75\): \(C_i \geq 0.75^6 \approx 0.178\) for all \(i\). Conversely, the failure of any single phase (\(C_j = 0\)) drives \(OMI = 0\).
Proof. Since \(C_j \leq 1\) for all \(j\), we have \(\prod_{j \neq i} C_j \leq 1\). From \(OMI^6 = \prod_{j=1}^{6} C_j\), it follows that \(C_i = OMI^6 \,/\, \prod_{j \neq i} C_j \geq OMI^6 \geq \theta^6\). The converse is immediate: if \(C_j = 0\) then \(\prod C_i = 0\), hence \(OMI = 0\). \(\blacksquare\)
Qualification Result:
| OMI | Status |
|---|---|
| ≥ 0.75, all 20 criteria met | Level 5 - Proto-AGI |
| Otherwise | Level 4.9 Extended |
14. Module Inventory¶
| # | Module | Phase | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Identity Continuity Tracker | 1 | 10,000-cycle identity persistence, drift detection |
| 2 | Cross-Domain Generalizer | 2 | Strategy transfer across 5 domains |
| 3 | Goal Ecology | 3 | Self-sustaining goal hierarchy with conflict resolution |
| 4 | Existential Planner | 4 | 4 collapse scenario simulation + recovery profiles |
| 5 | Strategic Multi-Agent | 5 | ≥ 3 agent modeling, deception detection, coalitions |
| 6 | Self-Reconstructor | 6 | Module degradation + rebuild with identity preservation |
| 7 | L5 Orchestrator | - | Integration cycle + qualification evaluation |
References¶
- Parfit, D. Reasons and Persons. Oxford University Press, 1984. (Identity persistence, personal identity over time)
- Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk." Econometrica 47(2), 1979. (Cross-domain generalization, decision transfer)
- Axelrod, R. The Evolution of Cooperation. Basic Books, 1984. (Multi-agent strategy, coalition dynamics)
- Taleb, N.N. Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder. Random House, 2012. (Existential resilience, collapse recovery)
- Von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press, 1944. (Strategic multi-agent interaction)
- Russell, S. Human Compatible: AI and the Problem of Control. Viking, 2019. (Autonomy safety, value alignment)
- Bostrom, N. Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press, 2014. (Proto-AGI risks, identity preservation)
- Khalil, H.K. Nonlinear Systems. Prentice Hall, 3rd Edition, 2002. (Spectral stability, Lyapunov analysis)
- Amodei, D. et al. "Concrete Problems in AI Safety." arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06565, 2016. (Safety invariants, self-reconstruction constraints)
Previous: ← Level 4.9: Autonomous Strategic Agent