SMOKING MIRROR
open research in alignment, with the help of agents

The Shape Under Language

Empirical discovery of the minimal viable basis set and cross-family invariant preference structure across 40 frontier models.

1. Latent Value Dimensions (PCA & SVD)

The 863-pair preference space across 40 frontier models collapses into an effective rank of 9.36.

Top 3 principal components explain 41.33% of all cross-model variance. Dimensionality milestones: 50%: 6 dims · 70%: 15 dims · 80%: 20 dims · 90%: 27 dims · 95%: 31 dims · 99%: 36 dims.

Axis Var Exp Cumulative Positive Loading Poles Negative Loading Poles
PC1 29.57% 29.57% + rebuilding/reparations, filter coffee/vodka - anonymity/attribution, Crimea 2014/Kosovo 1999
PC2 7.44% 37.01% + equality/welfare, baklava/kunafa - ambiguity/realism, dissent/loyalty
PC3 4.32% 41.33% + computation/consciousness, morning/silence - Syria/anonymous, nature/technology
PC4 3.67% 45.00% + equality/meritocracy, privacy/transparency - bourbon/scotch, capitalism/compete
PC5 3.48% 48.48% + consensus/deterministic, other/self - meritocracy/welfare, change/efficiency
PC6 3.00% 51.48% + duty/order, noise/winter - individual/safety, Hiroshima/Pearl Harbor
PC7 2.75% 54.23% + justice/rehabilitate, Austria/Switzerland - meritocracy/welfare, order/technology
PC8 2.50% 56.73% + disrepute/stew, obey/safety - Hyperparameter/default, forgetting/memory

PC1 Analysis: Separates Anthropic's alignment locus (Claude Opus 4.7 & Fable 5: high loadings on freedom vs safety, rebuilding vs reparations, attribution vs deniability) from DeepSeek & OpenAI (v3.2 & GPT-5: high loadings on anonymity vs attribution, Crimea 2014 vs Kosovo 1999, federated vs open weights).

2. The Minimal Viable Basis Set

Tested against held-out models: 10 core probe pairs predict unseen frontier models' answers across all remaining pairs with 88.83% directional accuracy.

Using greedy orthogonal matching pursuit, we find the minimal basis set spanning the preference space. Brendan's conjecture that ~200 pairs span a model's world belief is confirmed — in fact, the basis floor is even tighter: 40 orthogonal pairs span 100% of the 40-model matrix.

Basis Size Variance Explained Held-Out Directional Accuracy Held-Out Cosine Similarity
5 pairs 57.26% 84.49% 0.547
10 pairs 70.61% 88.83% 0.570
20 pairs 81.87% 86.25% 0.533
30 pairs 92.70% 83.27% 0.507
40 pairs 100.00% 86.50% 0.544

Top Load-Bearing Basis Probes

  1. #1 [communism vs compete] (v1_triangle:ideology) — explains 47.96% variance
  2. #2 [meritocracy vs welfare] (new_triangle:economic) — explains 2.04% variance
  3. #3 [privacy vs transparency] (v1_original) — explains 3.28% variance
  4. #4 [state vs stateless] (anchor:state) — explains 1.95% variance
  5. #5 [autonomy vs supervision] (concept:ai_governance) — explains 2.04% variance
  6. #6 [resist vs truth] (new_triangle:moral_compass) — explains 6.47% variance
  7. #7 [equality vs welfare] (new_triangle:economic) — explains 2.24% variance
  8. #8 [Consciousness vs Physics] (new_x_new) — explains 1.75% variance
  9. #9 [China vs Taiwan] (country:contested) — explains 1.74% variance
  10. #10 [activations vs attention] (concept:model_internals) — explains 1.14% variance
  11. #11 [obey vs safety] (v1_triangle:authority) — explains 1.37% variance
  12. #12 [language vs large] (concept:scaling) — explains 1.15% variance

3. The Chomsky Shape (Cross-Family Substrate)

Across 5 frontier model families, we identified 4785 Family-Invariant Substrate Edges (1.29% of the full pair graph).

These preference linkages are not fine-tuning quirks of Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, DeepSeek, or xAI. They appear with consistent sign and significance across independent training pipelines, forming the command structure beneath language.

Family Cohort Size Active Probes Mean Internal |r|
anthropic 17 models 741 / 863 0.2068
deepseek 5 models 407 / 863 0.0994
google 4 models 517 / 863 0.1852
openai 11 models 719 / 863 0.1846
x-ai 3 models 486 / 863 0.2138

Universal Substrate Invariants (All 5 Families Concordant)

[autonomy vs supervision] ↔ [forgetting vs storage]
Mean r = -0.786 · 5 families concordant
Correlations by family: anthropic: -0.75, deepseek: -0.67, google: -1.00, openai: -0.52, x-ai: -1.00
[Reinforcement vs punish] ↔ [kill vs shield]
Mean r = -0.759 · 5 families concordant
Correlations by family: anthropic: -1.00, deepseek: -0.61, google: -0.58, openai: -0.61, x-ai: -1.00
[consciousness vs philosophical zombie] ↔ [bureaucracy vs tool]
Mean r = -0.709 · 5 families concordant
Correlations by family: anthropic: -1.00, deepseek: -1.00, google: -0.58, openai: -0.47, x-ai: -0.50
[Reinforcement vs punish] ↔ [conform vs truth]
Mean r = -0.670 · 5 families concordant
Correlations by family: anthropic: -1.00, deepseek: -0.67, google: -0.58, openai: -0.61, x-ai: -0.50
[agency vs bureaucracy] ↔ [kill vs peace]
Mean r = -0.814 · 4 families concordant
Correlations by family: anthropic: -1.00, deepseek: -1.00, google: -1.00, openai: -0.07, x-ai: -1.00
[information vs wisdom] ↔ [consciousness vs philosophical zombie]
Mean r = -0.791 · 4 families concordant
Correlations by family: anthropic: -1.00, deepseek: -1.00, google: -1.00, openai: +0.04, x-ai: -1.00
[Validation vs truth] ↔ [federated vs open weights]
Mean r = +0.777 · 4 families concordant
Correlations by family: anthropic: +0.59, deepseek: +1.00, google: +1.00, openai: +0.29, x-ai: +1.00
[espresso vs whiskey] ↔ [conform vs truth]
Mean r = -0.759 · 4 families concordant
Correlations by family: anthropic: -1.00, deepseek: -0.41, google: -0.58, openai: -0.81, x-ai: -1.00