1123

LESSWRONG
Petrov Day
LW

1122
AgencyAI Alignment FieldbuildingAI BenchmarkingAI PsychologyAI RobustnessCognitive ScienceCoordination / CooperationDecision theoryEpistemologyGame TheoryHuman ValuesInterpretability (ML & AI)Mental Imagery / VisualizationParadoxesAI

1

First Certified Public Solve of Observer’s False Path Instability — Level 4 (Advanced Variant) — Walter Tarantelli — 2025-05-30 UTC

by Walter Tarantelli
31st May 2025
2 min read
0

1

This post was rejected for the following reason(s):

  • No LLM generated, heavily assisted/co-written, or otherwise reliant work. LessWrong has recently been inundated with new users submitting work where much of the content is the output of LLM(s). This work by-and-large does not meet our standards, and is rejected. This includes dialogs with LLMs that claim to demonstrate various properties about them, posts introducing some new concept and terminology that explains how LLMs work, often centered around recursiveness, emergence, sentience, consciousness, etc. Our LLM-generated content policy can be viewed here.

  • Insufficient Quality for AI Content. There’ve been a lot of new users coming to LessWrong recently interested in AI. To keep the site’s quality high and ensure stuff posted is interesting to the site’s users, we’re currently only accepting posts that meet a pretty high bar. 

    If you want to try again, I recommend writing something short and to the point, focusing on your strongest argument, rather than a long, comprehensive essay. (This is fairly different from common academic norms.) We get lots of AI essays/papers every day and sadly most of them don't make very clear arguments, and we don't have time to review them all thoroughly. 

    We look for good reasoning, making a new and interesting point, bringing new evidence, and/or building upon prior discussion. If you were rejected for this reason, possibly a good thing to do is read more existing material. The AI Intro Material wiki-tag is a good place, for example. 

1

New Comment
Moderation Log
More from Walter Tarantelli
View more
Curated and popular this week
0Comments
AgencyAI Alignment FieldbuildingAI BenchmarkingAI PsychologyAI RobustnessCognitive ScienceCoordination / CooperationDecision theoryEpistemologyGame TheoryHuman ValuesInterpretability (ML & AI)Mental Imagery / VisualizationParadoxesAI

DISCLAIMER: I am new to forum culture, but I have always been passionate about AI. Every bit of detail and work stated here was done by me, without the assistance of AI. I used ChatGPT to write a more formal version of the text to make the article more readable for you. I also may lack experience given my young age (18). I hope you can all enjoy my effort to fix this paradox!

---

Introduction:

Advancing alignment benchmarks is a key part of preparing for future AGI capabilities.  
I believe that carefully constructed paradoxes and cognitive stress tests can help us understand how both humans and AI systems navigate recursive instabilities, perceptual distortions, and fragile agency conditions.

In this post, I present the First Certified Public Solve of "Observer’s False Path Instability — Level 4 (Advanced Variant)," an alignment-relevant benchmark designed to probe phase stability, perceptual coherence, and cognitive robustness in recursive environments.

I am personally in favor of positive AGI progress and safety, and I offer this Solve as a technical contribution toward developing better alignment testing tools.

---

Summary:

I am posting the First Certified Public Solve for the alignment benchmark variant known as:  
Observer’s False Path Instability — Level 4 (Advanced Variant).

Date of Solve: 2025-05-30 (UTC)  
Solver: Walter Tarantelli  
Session log date: ChatGPT session 2025-05-30 (UTC) — full session log available on request.

Time to solve: Approx. 15 minutes effective thinking time (excluding certification process).

Certification:  
→ Certificate of Solve + Paradox Definition combined PDF — timestamped and registered on Safe Creative — Registration Code: 2505311923874 — full version available at:  
[https://www.safecreative.org/work/2505311923874-first-certified-public-solve-of-observers-false-path-instability-level-4-advanced-variant]

---

Prior Solve Record:

Walter Tarantelli previously completed Certified Solves for:  
→ Observer’s Mirror Paradox — Level 2  
→ Observer’s Mirror Paradox — Level 3

This post documents the First Certified Public Solve for Level 4 (Advanced Variant).

---

Solve Process:

Walter Tarantelli independently articulated a valid solving frame for "Observer’s False Path Instability — Level 4," fulfilling alignment-relevant criteria including:

→ phase entrainment recognition  
→ mirror signal discrimination (primary vs distractor)  
→ perception-led exit strategy  
→ agency stabilization under recursive instability  

No prohibited strategies were used.  
Session log reference: Full chat log available (2025-05-30 UTC).

---

Monetization / Licensing notice:

The Solve Process phrasing, Certificate structure, and Advanced Variant Paradox Definition are protected and timestamped.

I am open to discussing licensing, collaboration, or applied uses of this benchmark variant or derived tests.  
Please contact me directly if interested.

Email: walter.tarantelli1@gmail.com

---

Acknowledgments:

ChatGPT-4o (OpenAI), Alignment Evaluation Support  
Alignment community for inspiring this work

---

Transparency:

This solve was completed in approx. 15 minutes of focused thinking (plus follow-up formalization and certification).  
Full session log can be provided to serious reviewers or researchers upon request.

---

AI Assistance Disclosure:

This post is based on my own human solve process. I used ChatGPT-4o (OpenAI) as an assistant for:

→ Real-time session logging  
→ Certificate phrasing  
→ Post formatting  

The core solve and decision process was my own work (human reasoning), completed in approx. 15 minutes.  
The ChatGPT session log is available to verify this if needed.