Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)· 2026· Preprint
Theoretical Foundations
- 12citations
- 2026year
Short summary
This paper establishes a theoretical framework for studying sustained human-AI interaction by treating interaction trajectories as the primary unit of analysis. It draws on enactive and 4E cognition to address long-horizon phenomena like coherence drift and coordination.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Interaction trajectories are proposed as the primary unit of analysis for sustained human-AI interaction.
- Theoretical resources from enactive and 4E cognition are used to analyze coupled processes.
- The framework addresses Aguirre's two-obstacle formalization of the AI alignment problem.
- It argues that long-horizon phenomena cannot be reduced to isolated outputs or internal model states.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
SF0003: Theoretical Foundations This document establishes the theoretical foundations for studying sustained multi-turn interaction in human-AI dyads. Building on the empirically documented gaps identified in SF0002 (Sustained Multi-Turn Interaction in AI Systems), it provides a disciplined conceptual basis for treating interaction trajectories as the primary unit of analysis when evaluating long-horizon phenomena such as coherence drift, repair, coordination, and time-emergent harms. The theoretical resources employed are drawn from enactive and 4E cognition (embodied, embedded, enactive, extended) and the participatory sense-making tradition. These frameworks are used strictly as methodological precedents for analyzing coupled processes. They do not license claims about AI consciousness, inner experience, agency, or moral status. All claims advanced here concern observable interaction dynamics and their implications for evaluation, protocol design, and governance. The document engages Aguirre’s two-obstacle formalization of the alignment problem and locates the framework’s response with respect to each obstacle and to the control / alignment / refusal trilemma. It develops a theoretical response to each of the six gaps identified in SF0002, engages directly with the single-model-alignment-improvement alternative reading of the empirical evidence, and articulates the framework’s additive rather than replacive position. It establishes why sustained interaction trajectories constitute legitimate scientific objects, why long-horizon phenomena cannot be reduced to isolated outputs or internal model states, and how the framework positions itself with respect to the impossibility literature without overclaiming. This paper publishes as part of the coordinated five-paper Synthience foundation module (FPD-02, FPD-03, FPD-04, SF0003, SF0007). Document ID: SF0003 Version: 3.1.3 Author: Thomas W. Gantz Affiliation: Synthience Institute License: CC-BY 4.0 v3.1.3 to fix DOIsFor published work and Institute information: synthience.org
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research), 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Cognitive Neuroscience
Cognitive NeuroscienceNeuroscience