Can a Dynamic Internal Field Govern a Transformer's Cognition? Certifiability, not Superiority, in Homeostatic Compute Control
Francisco M. Arrabal-Campos, Ignacio Fernandez, Francisco G. Montoya, Alfredo Alcayde
Abstract
An intelligent system does not merely reason: it governs its own reasoning - how much to compute, when to stop, which module to activate. Can that role be played by a dynamic internal field - a low-dimensional homeostatic state with explicit physics and certified stability - that modulates cognition without performing it? Ours is a field on the module graph governed by a family of PDEs on the graph Laplacian, advancing with an adaptive-depth reasoner. We certify the stability of the integrator of the whole family - an integrator certificate, not a closed-loop one. New, and proved here: a discrete Schur-Cohn criterion for Verlet with velocity coupling, necessary and sufficient per latent root, with no commutation hypothesis. The answer is threefold: substance no, structure only in part, certifiability yes. The type of the field's physics is irrelevant for accuracy: wave, diffusion, gated mixtures and a 2D Navier-Stokes substrate tie. A twenty-seed preregistered deconfounding campaign bounds the structural claim: at equalized caps the second-order effect is strong in one family (+0.087 [+0.042, +0.132], t=4.0) but is not detected in the other (+0.014 [-0.013, +0.040], n.s.), so part of the original contrast was capacity, not order; and a matched-interface GRU is indistinguishable in the first and nominally exceeds the field in the second (-0.035 [-0.067, -0.002]). What distinguishes the field is not capability but that its one-step operator admits an exact runtime stability check - a difference of kind, not of existence: learned recurrences carry certificates too, sufficient and conservative ones. A kill-gate with a positive control finds no evidence for the field as evidence accumulator (Delta AUC +0.0007 [-0.0065, +0.0079] vs a 0.03 threshold). A dynamic internal field is a viable, certifiable compute governor, but not an enhancer of cognition: it modulates, it does not think.
Create a lesson
Related papers
MUSE: Benchmarking Large Vision-Language Models on Multi-Modal Understanding in Situated Education
Luyao Zhu, Xun Wei Yee, Wei Li et al.
Infinite-Parameter LLMs: Generating and Adapting Weights from Live Data
Jinli Hu, Ross M. Clarke, Yichuan Zhang et al.
Compositional Policy Violations: When Step-Level Compliance Fails In Agentic AI Workflows
Ashwini Kurady, Sri Sai Charith Grandhi, Rajesh Gupta et al.
CERA-MoA: Co-Evolving Routing Mechanisms with Continually Learning LLM Agents
Jiaxuan Jiang, Liyuan He, Zhixuan Fang
Version- and Scope-Aware Question Answering over Normative Documents: A Deployed System and an End-to-End Evaluation at Production Scale
Liuyin Wang, Shuaipeng Jin, Jiwei Shi et al.
Clueing up LLMs with Tool-Augmented Deductive Reasoning
Rebecca Ansell, Autumn Toney-Wails