Closed-Loop Knowledge Dynamics: An Operational Framework for Saturation and Escape

Feedback-driven loops support iterative improvement in large language models, reinforcement learning, and autonomous discovery, yet their gains often diminish under repeated internal feedback. We study why closed-loop knowledge systems saturate and what external information can move them beyond their current attractors. We introduce a three-level operational framework in which knowledge states $x_t$ evolve through transition kernels $K_θ$ indexed by a structural parameter $θ$. The governing structure is defined as the observational equivalence class of $θ$ induced by these kernels, while attractors and basins are properties of the fixed-$θ$ dynamics. A structural intervention changes $θ$ and produces a detectable kernel discrepancy on pre-specified probe states, making structural change falsifiable. Using a Lyapunov drift condition, we show that stable internal dynamics approach bounded stability regions with exponentially attenuated transients and a noise-controlled residual floor. We characterize escape through a metric condition on intervention-induced attractor displacement and a baseline-relative KL lower bound for increasing escape probability. This analysis also explains why conditional mutual information alone cannot certify escape: it measures variation among intervention-conditioned updates rather than departure from the no-intervention law. Case studies in LLM code repair, sparse-reward reinforcement learning, and Bayesian optimization use matched continuation controls to illustrate how feedback strength and alignment affect quality-improving escape. Our contribution is an operational connection among stability tools, measurable intervention effects, and cross-domain diagnostics.

BayesEvolve: Explicit Belief States for Autonomous Scientific Discovery

Autonomous scientific discovery systems increasingly use large language models (LLMs) to propose new hypotheses, but many such systems condition primarily on experimental memory: archives of high-scoring candidates or heuristic summaries of recent trials. We argue that discovery agents should instead maintain explicit, uncertainty-aware beliefs about hypothesis quality. We introduce BayesEvolve, a belief-guided discovery framework that converts experimental evidence into a predictive belief state and uses this belief to guide future experimentation. As a controlled testbed for belief-guided discovery, we evaluate BayesEvolve on shifted BBOB-style black-box optimization tasks, leaving program and laboratory discovery domains to future work. BayesEvolve improves sample efficiency over memory- and archive-guided LLM baselines under a fixed evaluation budget. We further show that the belief state is predictive on held-out candidate pools, that controlled decision-rule ablations favor belief-guided selection with an annealed uncertainty bonus, and that BayesEvolve exhibits productive late-stage concentration rather than unfocused exploration.