Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

Order Is Not Control: Driven-Dissipative Response Laws Across Artificial and Biological Systems

About

AI alignment, interpretability, steering, and neural perturbation studies identify order-inducing objects. We argue that order is not control. Control requires a receiver-gated response law: a denominator-indexed operator mapping material state, action/drive, bath, and receiver state to response displacement, sinks, effort, and basin projection. We identify it across biological, LLM, adapter, and stochastic-operator panels. The laws are local: an intervention can be admitted, saturated, sign-changing, leaky, or overdriven depending on medium, bath, receiver state, action port, and comparator. Control is assigned when finite effort moves a target or outcome-readout class under the same denominator while damage, null/evasive, invalid format, overdrive, and unnecessary effort stay bounded. Mouse ALM, C. elegans, and zebrafish panels provide physical response-operator evidence while excluding coordinate identity and controller conclusions. LLM panels show generated-output response laws: across four material conditions, response vectors are predictable at 72.8-73.7% component-sign accuracy, rising to 84.3-84.8% on nonzero components; held-out observers predict system-effect and target/oracle families at 93.6% and 91.7% accuracy. Constitution-conditioned adapters reshape susceptibility as prepared media, and stochastic-operator panels separate measured opportunity from deployable action policies. This gives a driven-dissipative response-system account at the mesoscopic control level: drives act through prepared media, baths, and receivers, producing admitted movement, impedance, sinks, or overdrive. The evidence supports local admitted control and measurable stochastic response operators, while leaving deployable pre-generation control, hidden/logit causal sufficiency, biological-to-LLM coordinate identity, and literal thermodynamic quantities outside scope.

Gareth Seneque, Lap-Hang Ho, Nafise Erfanian Saeedi, Jeffrey Molendijk, Tim Elson• 2026

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Physical response-operator predictionALM Biological perturbation response ports (held-out rows)
Sign Accuracy71.5969
2
Admission ControlAdmission boundary Action-admission panels Stochastic response-operator (rows blocks)
Opportunity Positive Blocks253
1
Directional response predictionPredictive response-vector law Four LLM material states (samples)
Component-Sign Accuracy72.77
1
Generated-output admittanceGenerated-output (Frozen completions)
Boundary Target Score1
1
Local admitted controlLocal Admitted Control Matched panels
Clean Composite Score86.9
1
Physical response-operator predictionworm Biological perturbation response ports
Sign Accuracy59.6825
1
Physical response-operator predictioncross-bio gate phase material rows
Gate Supported4
1
Prepared-medium susceptibilityPrepared medium Frozen base adapters (response cells)
Standard Editorial Principle Condition Delta0.1406
1
System-effect predictionHeld-out observer system-effect Non-endpoint features (source rows evals)
Accuracy93.57
1
Target/oracle predictionObserver target oracle Non-endpoint features (Held-out evals)
Accuracy91.74
1
Showing 10 of 10 rows

Other info

Follow for update