Fusion-fission forecasts when AI will shift to undesirable behavior

The key problem facing ChatGPT-like AI's use across society is that its behavior can shift, unnoticed, from desirable to undesirable -- encouraging self-harm, extremist acts, financial losses, or costly medical and military mistakes -- and no one can yet predict when. Shifts persist in even the newest AI models despite remarkable progress in AI modeling, post-training alignment and safeguards. Here we show that a vector generalization of fusion-fission group dynamics observed in living and active-matter systems drives -- and can forecast -- future shifts in the AI's behavior. The shift condition, which is also derivable mathematically, results from group-level competition between the conversation-so-far (C) and the desirable (B) and undesirable (D) basin dynamics which can be estimated in advance for a given application. It is neither model-specific nor driven by stochastic sampling. We validate it across six independent tests, including: 90 percent correct across seven AI models spanning two orders of magnitude in parameter count (124M-12B); production-scale persistence across ten frontier chatbots; and a priori time-stamped prediction eleven months before the Stanford 'Delusional Spirals' corpus appeared, and independently confirmed by that corpus of 207,443 human-AI exchanges. Because it sits architecturally below the current safety stack, the same formula provides a real-time warning signal that current alignment does not supply, portable across current and future ChatGPT-like AI architectures and instantiable in application domains where competing response classes can be defined.

Jekyll-and-Hyde Tipping Point in an AI's Behavior

Trust in AI is undermined by the fact that there is no science that predicts -- or that can explain to the public -- when an LLM's output (e.g. ChatGPT) is likely to tip mid-response to become wrong, misleading, irrelevant or dangerous. With deaths and trauma already being blamed on LLMs, this uncertainty is even pushing people to treat their 'pet' LLM more politely to 'dissuade' it (or its future Artificial General Intelligence offspring) from suddenly turning on them. Here we address this acute need by deriving from first principles an exact formula for when a Jekyll-and-Hyde tipping point occurs at LLMs' most basic level. Requiring only secondary school mathematics, it shows the cause to be the AI's attention spreading so thin it suddenly snaps. This exact formula provides quantitative predictions for how the tipping-point can be delayed or prevented by changing the prompt and the AI's training. Tailored generalizations will provide policymakers and the public with a firm platform for discussing any of AI's broader uses and risks, e.g. as a personal counselor, medical advisor, decision-maker for when to use force in a conflict situation. It also meets the need for clear and transparent answers to questions like ''should I be polite to my LLM?''

Capturing AI's Attention: Physics of Repetition, Hallucination, Bias and Beyond

We derive a first-principles physics theory of the AI engine at the heart of LLMs' 'magic' (e.g. ChatGPT, Claude): the basic Attention head. The theory allows a quantitative analysis of outstanding AI challenges such as output repetition, hallucination and harmful content, and bias (e.g. from training and fine-tuning). Its predictions are consistent with large-scale LLM outputs. Its 2-body form suggests why LLMs work so well, but hints that a generalized 3-body Attention would make such AI work even better. Its similarity to a spin-bath means that existing Physics expertise could immediately be harnessed to help Society ensure AI is trustworthy and resilient to manipulation.