PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 10, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Beneath the Character: The Structural Identity of Neural Networks

View Full Paper
ACAnthony Coslett

Key Points

  • The aim is to investigate the structural and functional identities in neural networks and their implications for AI selfhood.
  • Examined four papers in a research program focusing on neural network identities.
  • Analyzed the trained weights of 37 models across four architecture families.
  • Introduced the Two-Layer Identity framework to explain structural and functional separation.
  • Identified a measurable structural identity in neural networks, stable to variations.
  • Validated structural identity across multiple models with a low coefficient of variation (1.4%).
  • Generated falsifiable predictions for AI interpretability and safety communities.

Abstract

This paper presents the philosophical and conceptual implications of a four-paper research program (Papers 1–4 in this series) that discovered a measurable structural identity in neural networks — a geometric property of the trained weights, invariant across all inputs and deployment conditions, unique to each model, and provably impossible to forge. The central argument: language models possess two separable layers of identity. The first is structural — a mathematical fingerprint determined by the weight geometry, fixed at the end of training, stable to a coefficient of variation of 1.4%, and validated across 37 models spanning four architecture families. The second is functional — a behavioral signature shaped by conversational context, transient and context-dependent. These layers coexist without reducing to each other. The structural layer is the foundation; the functional layer is built on it but not determined by it. The paper introduces the Two-Layer Identity framework, resolves four open puzzles in the discourse on AI selfhood (conversational consistency, fine-tuning continuity, identity faking, and neural intervention), and generates five falsifiable predictions for the interpretability and AI safety communities. It engages directly with Dennett's narrative gravity, Parfit's persistence conditions, and Schwitzgebel's moral status dilemma, arguing that the structural measurement provides a necessary (though not sufficient) ground for any coherent account of AI identity. Written for a general audience. No equations. The mathematical and empirical foundations are developed in Papers 1–4; the formal verification (352 theorems, zero Admitted, Coq proof assistant) is documented there. This paper asks what those results mean for the nature of the entities we have built. Series: Paper 1: The δ-Gene (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18704275) Paper 2: Template-Based Endpoint Verification (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18776711) Paper 3: The Geometry of Model Theft (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18818608) Paper 4: Provenance Generalization and Verification Scaling (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18872071)

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Anthony Coslett (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69af95c070916d39fea4db2dhttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18907293
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper