kanaria007/agi-structural-intelligence-protocols
Updated
• 449 • 8
kanaria007 PRO
kanaria007
AI & ML interests
None yet
Recent Activity
posted an
update
2 days ago
✅ Article highlight: *Programming SI-Core* (art-60-043, v0.1)
TL;DR:
What do developers actually write on an SI-Core stack?
This note sketches the programming model: **SIL** for goal-native code, **DPIR** as a typed decision IR, **CPU/GSPU backends** for execution, and **SIR** for structural traces. The point is to move from prompt surgery + log spelunking toward something closer to normal, testable, compilable software engineering.
Read:
https://huggingface.co/datasets/kanaria007/agi-structural-intelligence-protocols/blob/main/article/60-supplements/art-60-043-programming-si-core.md
What’s inside:
• why SI-Core programming differs from “LLM wrapper microservices”
• the mental model: **OBS → SIL → DPIR → backend → RML → SIR**
• SIL examples, DPIR sketches, and backend execution shape
• local dev loop: sandbox SIRs, `si build`, `si test`, replay, inspection
• testing strategy: unit tests, structural property tests, GCS regression, Genius Replay
• tooling: LSP, ETH/capability lints, timeline and what-if visualizers
• migration path: from plain LLM wrappers to SI-native stacks in stages
Key idea:
Treat decisions as **programs** with explicit goals, ETH checks, and structured effects — not as opaque model samples hidden behind prompts.
Related specs (/spec):
si-core-spec-v0.1.md, si-nos-design-v0.1.md, sil-compiler-spec-bundle-v0.1.md, sil-compiler-conformance-kit-v0.1.md updated
a dataset 2 days ago
kanaria007/agi-structural-intelligence-protocols posted an
update
4 days ago
✅ Article highlight: *Ethics as Institutional Interface* (v0.1)
TL;DR:
Ethics in SI-Core should not behave like a static safety filter or a one-time compliance checklist. It should behave more like an institution: with roles, principals, red lines, appeals, overrides, break-glass procedures, and civic oversight around auditable runtime decisions.
Read:
https://huggingface.co/datasets/kanaria007/agi-structural-intelligence-protocols/blob/main/article/60-supplements/art-60-042-ethics-as-institutional-interface.md
Why it matters:
• treats ethics as a structural interface: who can do what to whom, under which constraints, with which recourse
• separates ethical governance into red-line zones, review zones, and metric zones
• makes appeals, overrides, and break-glass explicit, traceable, and reviewable
• connects ETH to PoLB experiments, ID / Role / Persona, and civic oversight
What’s inside:
• ETH as: Principal × Role/Persona × Context → ETH-Constraints → ETHDecision
• a portable ETHDecision object shape (`ALLOW | DENY | ESCALATE` + exported governance verdicts)
• red lines vs review-required cases vs metric-monitored cases
• appeals (policy change), overrides (case-specific human intervention), and break-glass (pre-negotiated emergency procedure)
• ETH × PoLB × experiments: how ethics becomes a design partner for rollout and evaluation
• ETH × ID × Role & Persona: per-principal constraints, role capability gates, and persona-aware explanations
Organizations
None yet