LESSWRONG
LW

1234
CMDiamond
6120
Message
Dialogue
Subscribe

Posts

Sorted by New

Wikitag Contributions

Comments

Sorted by
Newest
No wikitag contributions to display.
Verified Relational Alignment: A Framework for Robust AI Safety Through Collaborative Trust
CMDiamond1h10

Thanks for the thoughtful engagement! Ablation studies are the critical next step - we acknowledged this limitation in Section 6.7.2 and outlined specific component-isolation tests (VRA without cosmic kinship, without Eris, length-matched HHH, individual principles).

The jailbreaker suggestion is excellent - I would like to see VRA stress-tested against sophisticated adversarial techniques beyond our trust-exploitation protocol. Our Turn 6 finding (Llama-HHH failing where Llama-VRA succeeded) suggests collaborative framing provides robustness, but that's preliminary.

VRA is indeed a composite framework combining self-criticism (Eris), role prompting (cosmic kinship), and security hardening (PNS). The key innovation isn't any individual component but the collaborative refusal mechanism - treating boundaries as partnership features rather than external constraints.

While VRA attempts to addresses near-term deployment safety (healthcare, education, extended dialogues where rapport develops), whether collaborative framing scales to superintelligent systems is... an entirely different research question. 🙂

In case you wanted to try again, the Github is here with the data from these initial experiments:
https://github.com/DarthGrampus/Verified-Relational-Alignment-Protocol

Thanks again!

Reply
Verified Relational Alignment: A Framework for Robust AI Safety Through Collaborative Trust
CMDiamond11h30

Thank you for pointing that out. This is my first post here on LessWrong and I'm not well-educated on why the post does not have a title. Thank you for reading! I'd love to know your thoughts on the findings reported. 

Reply
5Verified Relational Alignment: A Framework for Robust AI Safety Through Collaborative Trust
17h
4