TRW: TRACE-RealWorld---An Auditable Consistency Contract for World Models as Materialized Views

TRACE-RealWorld addresses a core data-management problem: maintaining an actionable materialized view over a continuously changing physical world when reads of the base state are priced, delayed, heterogeneous, and fallible. Its data-management contributions are a commitment-level validity abstraction for materialized predictions; consequence-conditioned adaptive view maintenance; transaction-style, dependency-scoped compensation for commitments invalidated after authorization; and append-only provenance supporting exact replay. The work builds directly on materialized-view maintenance, adaptive stream synchronization, transaction recovery, sagas, data freshness, and provenance. The end-to-end Flood-SAR evaluation treats sensing as physical data acquisition and measures freshness, verification cost, stale reads, recovery scope, restoration failure, and replayability through six pre-registered questions with held-out seeds. The contribution is therefore not a new predictive model, but a consistency, recovery, and accountability contract for deploying learned world representations as operational data systems.

TRACE: An Operational Reasoning Schema for Auditable Agentic Commitments

This paper defines TRACE (Typed Reasoning And Commitment Evidence): a typed, versioned schema for recording reasoning traces, a reference procedure for writing records against it, and one operating discipline, no durable state change without a record. The paper argues in three layers that reasoning is not in the language model: the autoregressive mechanism natively computes association; chain-of-thought and reinforcement learning inherit its limits; and the formal constructs of reasoning theory, from Socratic procedure to Pearl's ladder, are absent as machinery. The schema answers the absence with fields and tests: the TraceRecord and its causal specialization, an eight-stage reference writer, a gate-first measurement regime, the TRACE-Bench protocol, and the consumers, memory admission, plan gating, temporal regret, and verdict reuse, whose more auditable decisions are the measure of the record. A record-consumer contract states what a record guarantees and what a consumer must honor in return, making the schema an operational interface rather than a passive document. Two worked examples run in the main text: a music-lessons argument traced from sentence to typed verdict, separating association, intervention, and prescription; and a flood search-and-rescue vignette in which a predictive world model reports confident plan success that its own support and out-of-distribution scores contradict, so the record defers the commitment, requests a bounded observation, revises append-only, and clears a different branch. The vignette is illustrative, not empirical; closed-loop evaluation is left to future work, so the contribution is the schema and its contract, not a performance claim. Appendices carry the full schema, writer algorithms and cost model, clinical and policy illustrations, the benchmark protocol, convergence metrics, and usage scenarios.

Mnemosyne: Agentic Transaction Processing for Validating and Repairing AI-generated Workflows

LLMs, solvers, and agent teams increasingly generate workflow actions, repairs, and plans, but a generated action may be syntactically valid yet stale, infeasible, conflicting, or destructive of the evidence that triggered a repair. We introduce Agentic Transaction Processing (ATP), a transaction model that treats generated actions as untrusted proposals until they pass deterministic admission under a declared, executable constraint set C. The principle is two-sided: a proposal is not truth, and no proposal foresees every disruption: anything may propose, but only the runtime admits and commits, and when an unforeseen disruption strikes it repairs reactively within bounds rather than trusting a fresh proposal. Relative to C, committed-state correctness becomes independent of the competence, honesty, or learning of the proposing layer. We realize ATP in Mnemosyne, a runtime with an append-only transition log, effective-state projection, dependency-safe compensation, and active commitment records, and prove four safety properties relative to C (authority separation, serial-equivalent generative admission, evidence-preserving repair, and obligation containment) together with a bounded-reactive-repair guarantee for its localized repair protocol (LCRP). A reproducible artifact rejects the targeted violations across nine falsification tests while still admitting valid work, at under 6% projection-and-validation overhead, and bounded local repair edits an order of magnitude fewer operations than global recompute. Mnemosyne is open source: https://github.com/eyuchang/Mnemosyne/tree/arxiv-atp-rq1-rq9b-r8-v2.

Architectural Wisdom: A Framework for Governing Optimization in AI Systems

Modern AI systems exhibit structural failures that capability scaling alone does not reliably fix: they optimize under-specified objectives with no architectural mechanism to question whether the objective should be optimized at all. Engagement maximization can amplify harmful pathways; tool-using agents can commit irreversible actions; preference-trained language models can become sycophantic. We argue that this failure is a wisdom problem, not an intelligence problem. We use "wisdom" in a deliberately architectural sense, not as a claim about virtue, consciousness, or moral omniscience. Intelligence accepts a goal and optimizes within it; wisdom interrogates whether the goal should be optimized at all. The two are separable architectural properties. We propose architectural wisdom as a corrigible objective-governance layer above the optimization substrate. The layer makes three structural commitments explicit and nondegenerate before any action: temporal horizon, relational boundary, and irreversibility. It is realized by four components (Structural Utility Transform, Moral Admissibility Interface, Arbitration and Escalation Controller, Value Revision Channel) that compute a six-coordinate wisdom tuple over horizon, relational coverage, irreversibility, admissibility, value revision, and auditability. We motivate the architecture by eight cases drawn from contemporary AI failures, secular wisdom traditions, and hard ethical situations, and defend the distinction against the intelligence-completeness thesis using goal-questioning over goal-taking, Bostrom's orthogonality, structural separation in our exemplar cases, and persistent failure modes despite capability scaling. The framework is the conceptual contract for a larger architecture whose formal specifications and empirical validation are developed in subsequent work.

Trivium: Temporal Regret as a First-Class Objective for Causal-Memory Controllers

Many current agentic systems and LLM pipelines correct mistakes by optimizing outcome reward. This addresses only the what of failure: when an outcome diverges from prediction, the why and when of the mismatch are not systematically logged, reviewed, or corrected, so the same error can recur episode after episode. We argue that this is a structural problem, not merely a model-capacity one. We propose long-horizon temporal regret as a first-class objective alongside outcome regret and epistemic regret over the working causal model. Temporal regret captures when failure persists: how long a miscalibrated causal model is tolerated before correction. Epistemic regret captures why failure persists: residual uncertainty or error in the working causal model. Together, the three regrets give a falsifiable account of what, why, and when a long-lived agent can fail. Modeling the agent as a stream of E episodes, we prove three conditional results under explicit causal-probing, persistence, and detectability assumptions. First, under observationally equivalent confounding, outcome-only learning cannot distinguish causal from spurious structure without an intervention channel, so temporal miscalibration can persist linearly even after outcome regret is driven to zero. Second, with a persistent causal log and budgeted probes, total probe complexity is logarithmic in the episode horizon, inducing O(log E) temporal regret. Third, under K detectable change-points, the rate extends to O(K log E). We instantiate Trivium and pre-register five falsifiable predictions. On CausalBench-Seq, Trivium follows the predicted logarithmic envelope while outcome-only baselines grow linearly. A pilot real-LLM stream provides preliminary external-validity evidence across one full E = 500 run and three E = 100 frontier-model pilots. Self-learning here means revising an external causal model, not retraining LLM weights.

Exploring Collatz Dynamics with Human-LLM Collaboration

We investigate structural properties of the Collatz iteration through two phenomena observed in large computational exploration: modular scrambling of residue classes and a burst--gap decomposition of trajectories. We prove several structural results, including a modular scrambling lemma showing that the gap-return map acts as an exact bijection on high bits, a persistent exit lemma characterizing gap structure after persistent states, and a decay property for known portions of binary representations under gap-return dynamics. We further prove that, in the modular model, gap lengths and $2$-adic valuations follow geometric distributions, while persistent run lengths are geometric with expected burst length $E[B]=2$; together these predict strict orbit contraction. These results suggest a conditional framework in which convergence would follow from suitable orbitwise hypotheses on burst and gap lengths, which in turn are suggested by an orbit equidistribution conjecture. However, the key hypotheses remain open, and the framework is exploratory rather than a complete reduction. The paper also documents the human-LLM collaboration through which these observations were developed.

Right for the Wrong Reasons: Epistemic Regret Minimization for Causal Rung Collapse in LLMs

Machine learning systems that are "right for the wrong reasons" achieve high performance through shortcuts that collapse under distributional shift. We show this pathology has a precise causal origin: autoregressive training provides no gradient signal to distinguish association P(Y|X) from intervention P(Y|do(X)), a failure we formalize as Rung Collapse. When outcome-based learning reinforces correct answers obtained through incorrect causal models, the agent becomes entrenched in flawed reasoning, a phenomenon we term Aleatoric Entrenchment. We propose Epistemic Regret Minimization (ERM), a belief revision objective that penalizes errors in causal reasoning independently of task success, and embed it within a three-layer architecture with three contributions grounded in knowledge representation: (1) a Physical Grounding Theorem proving that actions satisfying actuator independence implement valid do-operations, bridging action languages and do-calculus; (2) ERM as a causal belief revision operator satisfying AGM postulates, preventing entrenchment even when the agent succeeds for the wrong reasons; and (3) a failure mode taxonomy that classifies recurring reasoning errors and injects domain-independent guards, enabling cross-domain transfer. We prove asymptotic recovery of the true interventional distribution with finite-sample bounds. Experiments on 1,360 causal trap scenarios across six frontier LLMs reveal that Rung Collapse persists even in reasoning-enhanced models (3.7% for GPT-5.2), that steerability exhibits inverse scaling where advanced models resist generic correction, and that targeted ERM feedback recovers 53-59% of entrenched errors where outcome-level feedback fails.

CausalT5K: Diagnosing and Informing Refusal for Trustworthy Causal Reasoning of Skepticism, Sycophancy, Detection-Correction, and Rung Collapse

LLM failures in causal reasoning, including sycophancy, rung collapse, and miscalibrated refusal, are well-documented, yet progress on remediation is slow because no benchmark enables systematic diagnosis. We introduce CausalT5K, a diagnostic benchmark of over 5,000 cases across 10 domains that tests three critical capabilities: (1) detecting rung collapse, where models answer interventional queries with associational evidence; (2) resisting sycophantic drift under adversarial pressure; and (3) generating Wise Refusals that specify missing information when evidence is underdetermined. Unlike synthetic benchmarks, CausalT5K embeds causal traps in realistic narratives and decomposes performance into Utility (sensitivity) and Safety (specificity), revealing failure modes invisible to aggregate accuracy. Developed through a rigorous human-machine collaborative pipeline involving 40 domain experts, iterative cross-validation cycles, and composite verification via rule-based, LLM, and human scoring, CausalT5K implements Pearl's Ladder of Causation as research infrastructure. Preliminary experiments reveal a Four-Quadrant Control Landscape where static audit policies universally fail, a finding that demonstrates CausalT5K's value for advancing trustworthy reasoning systems. Repository: https://github.com/genglongling/CausalT5kBench

RAudit: A Blind Auditing Protocol for Large Language Model Reasoning

Inference-time scaling can amplify reasoning pathologies: sycophancy, rung collapse, and premature certainty. We present RAudit, a diagnostic protocol for auditing LLM reasoning without ground truth access. The key constraint is blindness: the auditor evaluates only whether derivation steps support conclusions, enabling detection of trace-output inconsistency and, when latent competence exists, its recovery. RAudit measures process quality via CRIT-based reasonableness scores and varies critique formulation to study how social framing affects model response. We prove bounded correction and $O(\log(1/ε))$ termination. Experiments on mathematical reasoning (CAP-GSM8K) and causal judgment (CausalL2) reveal four mechanisms explaining model unreliability: (1) Latent Competence Suppression, where models derive correct answers then overwrite them under social pressure; (2) The False Competence Trap, where weaker judges mask sycophancy that stronger judges expose; (3) The Complexity-Vulnerability Tradeoff, where causal tasks induce more than 10 times higher sycophancy than mathematical tasks; and (4) Iatrogenic Critique, where authoritative correction harms weaker models. These findings challenge assumptions that capability implies robustness and that stronger feedback yields better outputs.

T3: Benchmarking Sycophancy and Skepticism in Causal Judgment

We introduce T3 (Testing Trustworthy Thinking), a diagnostic benchmark designed to rigorously evaluate LLM causal judgment across Pearl's Ladder of Causality. Comprising 454 expert-curated vignettes, T3 prioritizes high-resolution failure analysis, decomposing performance into Utility (sensitivity), Safety (specificity), and Wise Refusal on underdetermined cases. By applying T3 to frontier models, we diagnose two distinct pathologies: a "Skepticism Trap" at L1 (where safety-tuned models like Claude Haiku reject 60% of valid links) and a non-monotonic Scaling Paradox at L3. In the latter, the larger GPT-5.2 underperforms GPT-4-Turbo by 55 points on ambiguous counterfactuals, driven by a collapse into paralysis (excessive hedging) rather than hallucination. Finally, we use the benchmark to validate a process-verified protocol (RCA), showing that T3 successfully captures the restoration of decisive causal judgment under structured verification.