CM-2 Example Scenarios

From publications
Revision as of 02:17, 21 March 2026 by Ralph (talk | contribs) (Created page with "=== Example Scenario: Engineering Compliance Drift and Recovery === Consider an engineering workflow where an LLM is used to assist in producing a compliance-certified design report. The governing requirements include: * adherence to a defined engineering standard * preservation of calculation provenance * strict sequencing of validation steps * prohibition of unauthorised assumption or substitution ==== Without CM-2 ==== During interaction: * the model initially re...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Example Scenario: Engineering Compliance Drift and Recovery

Consider an engineering workflow where an LLM is used to assist in producing a compliance-certified design report.

The governing requirements include:

  • adherence to a defined engineering standard
  • preservation of calculation provenance
  • strict sequencing of validation steps
  • prohibition of unauthorised assumption or substitution

Without CM-2

During interaction:

  • the model initially references the correct standard
  • intermediate steps are summarised and compressed
  • a constraint (mandatory verification step) is omitted
  • a derived value is recomputed using an alternative method
  • provenance of the original calculation is lost

The output remains fluent and plausible.

However:

  • the required validation step is missing
  • the calculation path is no longer auditable
  • the result cannot be certified
  • the error is not detectable through surface inspection

This is drift.
Not a mistake.
Not hallucination.
Loss of invariant-governed state.

With CM-2

At the point of inference:

  • admissible state is validated against CM invariants
  • required Epistemic Objects (EO) are checked for presence
  • sequencing constraints are enforced
  • provenance bindings are verified

When the validation step is absent:

  • a constraint violation is detected
  • the system identifies an Attention Deficit condition (missing required EO)

The ROC ladder is invoked:

  • the missing validation object is restored
  • the correct calculation lineage is reintroduced
  • the required sequencing is reinstated

The model is not permitted to proceed until:

  • all required invariants are satisfied
  • all governing objects are present in inference

Result

  • the output is complete
  • the validation step is present
  • provenance is preserved
  • the result is auditable
  • the artefact is admissible for compliance use

Interpretation

The difference is not improved intelligence.

The difference is that:

  • invalid states are not permitted to enter inference
  • missing governing objects are detected and restored
  • invariant violation is made non-representable

This is the transition from:

reconstruction → governed execution

categories