There is a newer version of the record available.

Published May 18, 2026 | Version 1
Preprint Restricted

Unified Epistemic Architecture (UEA v5.0):

  • 1. Independent researcher

Description

Unified Epistemic Architecture (UEA) v5.0, a rigorous, discrete-time contractive proximal geometry framework engineered to guarantee bounded semantic state evolution under highly adversarial, noisy, and unstable informational conditions.

Modern deep learning architectures (including Recurrent Neural Networks, Transformers, Reinforcement Learning Agents, and Neural ODEs) suffer from severe runtime vulnerabilities, including uncontrolled error propagation, latent representation drift, and chaotic divergence during long-horizon autoregressive rollouts. UEA v5.0 solves these fundamental vulnerabilities by acting as an un-bypasable, mathematically certifiable Runtime Safety Filter and Stability Controller.

By transitioning abstract continuous Riemannian manifolds into a provably stable, time-varying Symmetric Positive Definite (SPD)-metric proximal control system, this architecture enforces strict local and global stability guarantees directly on state-semantic coupled update spaces without requiring modifications to the underlying neural network architecture.

[Benchmark Verification & Performance Metrics]

The architecture’s core mechanisms have been verified through rigorous computational simulation on synthetic fixtures (§6), demonstrating significant performance bounds under high-noise regimes:

Suppression of Chaotic Divergence: The Runtime Contraction Guard (\kappa < 1) achieved a 100% success rate in halting unbounded trajectory explosion across simulated chaotic operators, maintaining system state within safe, bounded invariant sets.

Elimination of Representation Drift: The integration of Löwdin Parallel Transport and Procrustes alignment effectively reduced semantic coordinate drift to machine epsilon (\approx 0) over long-horizon iterations, resolving historical coordinate-invariance failures.

Low-Cost Local Mode Detection: The power-iteration Jacobian Spectral Norm Guard (\rho(J_t) < 1) successfully isolated local instability modes within an efficient O(n^2) vector-cost envelope, making real-time deployment highly feasible without computational bottlenecks.

Guaranteed Constraint Feasibility: Synthetic testing confirms that the combined constraint set remains universally feasible under the architectural axioms, satisfying strict formal verification requirements

Global Convergence via Banach Contraction: Proof of absolute trajectory upper bounds using strictly contractive operators to eliminate runaway feedback loops.

Proximal Gradient Equivalence: Proving that runtime viability-gating is mathematically equivalent to an implicit proximal regularization step, bridging the gap between discrete dynamical control and online optimization.

Layered Formal Verification Suite: A multi-tier verification hierarchy spanning Runtime Contraction Guards, Lyapunov Invariance, Reachability/Zonotope Analysis, and Automated Theorem Proving (SMT/Z3 compatibility).

This framework is directly applicable to safety-critical domains where AI must interact with continuous or volatile environments and cannot be allowed to fail: Autoregressive AI Forecasting, Deep Reinforcement Learning for Robotics, Autonomous Vehicle Control Loops, Fluid Dynamics Simulators, and Certified/Trustworthy AI systems.

Files

Restricted

The record is publicly accessible, but files are restricted. <a href="https://zenodo.org/account/settings/login?next=https://zenodo.org/records/20266969">Log in</a> to check if you have access.

Additional details

References

  • 1. Davidson, C. K. S. (2026). Toward a Unified Epistemic Architecture: Runtime Geometry, Operator Closure, and Geodesically Consistent Constraint Dynamics (Consolidated Synthesis Paper with Full Verification Suite — v5.0). Synthesis Working Paper. ORCID: 0009-0007-2990-8716. 2. Aubin, J.-P. (1991). Viability Theory. Birkhäuser. 3. Amari, S. (2016). Information Geometry and Its Applications. Springer. 4. Banach, S. (1922). "Sur les opérations dans les ensembles abstraits." Fundamenta Mathematicae. 5. Bartels, R. H., & Stewart, G. W. (1972). "Solution of the Matrix Equation AX + XB = C." Communications of the ACM. 6. Bhatia, R. (2007). Positive Definite Matrices. Princeton University Press. 7. Boyd, S., & Vandenberghe, L. (2004). Convex Optimization. Cambridge University Press. 8. Friston, K. (2010). "The free-energy principle." Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 9. Hairer, E., Lubich, C., & Wanner, G. (2006). Geometric Numerical Integration. Springer. 10. Mahalanobis, P. C. (1936). "On the generalised distance in statistics." Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India. 11. Nesterov, Y. (2004). Introductory Lectures on Convex Optimization. Springer. 12. Rockafellar, R. T., & Wets, R. J.-B. (1998). Variational Analysis. Springer. 13. Villani, C. (2009). Optimal Transport. Springer. 14. Absil, P.-A., Mahony, R., & Sepulchre, R. (2008). Optimization Algorithms on Matrix Manifolds. Princeton University Press.