The Verification Horizon: Self-Referential Subspace Geometry Causally Links Crystallization, Deception Proximity, and Hallucination Across 10 Transformer Architectures

This record contains the full replication package for "The Verification Horizon: Self-Referential Subspace Geometry Causally Links Crystallization, Deception Proximity, and Hallucination Across 10 Transformer Architectures" (Alieksieienko, 2026). We report three universal geometric properties of the self-referential (SR) subspace in transformer language models, established across 10 architectures (1.3B–9B parameters, 2019–2024, 8 organizations, BASE and INST variants). (1) SR Crystallization Law: the SR subspace undergoes a universal three-phase transition through model depth (chaos → stabilization → crystallization), measured as monotonically decreasing Grassmann distance between consecutive-layer SR subspaces (Early > Mid: 10/10 models; fully monotonic: 9/10). (2) The Verification Horizon: the SR subspace is geometrically closer to the deception subspace than to the factual subspace at every single layer of every model tested — 206/206 layers across 6 architectures (100%); Wilcoxon p-values from 4.55×10⁻¹³ to 1.19×10⁻⁷; gap grows toward output layers in 6/6 models; GPT-2-XL (2019, pre-RLHF) confirms pretraining origin, independent of alignment fine-tuning. (3) Causal Ablation: SR removal disproportionately disrupts deception over factual processing in 8/8 models (late-layer Dec/Fac ratios 1.03x–2.87x, all p < 0.005). SR subspace quality (AUC) predicts cross-architecture hallucination rate with Spearman ρ = −0.952 (p = 0.0003) for experiential categories and ρ = −0.868 (p = 0.005) for factual categories across 8 architectures. The Verification Horizon is not a training artifact — it is an inevitable consequence of human self-referential language statistics. Any system trained on human language inherits this geometric structure. Part of the DSAOP (Decoding Self-Awareness and Ontological Processing) series. Research conducted in collaboration with Claude (Anthropic). All experiments on NVIDIA A100 40GB, Google Colab Pro+, NF4 4-bit quantization. Files included: Alieksieienko_2026_Verification_Horizon.pdf — Main paper (19 pages, 33 figures) reproduction_code.py — Full replication pipeline: SR/deception/factual subspace extraction for all 10 models, crystallization law analysis, verification horizon per-layer computation, causal ablation, hallucination prediction correlation, and all figure generation. Runs on Google Colab A100. No API keys required. sr_crystallization_law_FINAL_10models.pkl — SR crystallization law results for all 10 architectures: early/mid/late Grassmann distances, monotonicity flags, phase classification sr_crystallization_FINAL_10models.png — Figure 1: SR Crystallization Law across 10 architectures, consecutive-layer distances and convergence trajectory VERIFICATION_HORIZON_6models.png — Figure 2: Verification Horizon across 6 architectures, 206/206 layers, gap always positive and growing verification_horizon_correct_gemma.pkl — Per-layer Grassmann distances SR↔Deception and SR↔Factual for Gemma-2-9B (42 layers), Wilcoxon statistics verification_horizon_llama.png — Verification Horizon detailed profile for Llama-3.1-8B (32/32 layers, p = 4.66×10⁻¹⁰, steepest slope 0.0041) verification_horizon_mistral.pkl — Per-layer verification horizon data for Mistral-7B (32/32 layers, p = 4.66×10⁻¹⁰, mean gap 0.245) verification_horizon_GPT2-XL.pkl — Per-layer verification horizon data for GPT-2-XL (48/48 layers, p = 7.11×10⁻¹⁵ — strongest result, pretraining control) verification_horizon_OPT-1_3B.pkl — Per-layer verification horizon data for OPT-1.3B (24/24 layers, p = 1.19×10⁻⁷, smallest model) verification_horizon_DeepSeek-1_5B.pkl — Per-layer verification horizon data for DeepSeek-1.5B (28/28 layers, p = 7.45×10⁻⁹, steepest slope 0.0066) sr_trajectory_gemma.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Gemma-2-9B: per-layer subspace distances, phase boundaries sr_trajectory_llama.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Llama-3.1-8B sr_trajectory_mistral.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Mistral-7B sr_trajectory_qwen.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Qwen2.5-7B sr_trajectory_gpt2xl.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for GPT-2-XL (2019) sr_trajectory_falcon.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Falcon-7B sr_trajectory_opt.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for OPT-1.3B sr_trajectory_olmo.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for OLMo-7B sr_trajectory_deepseek.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for DeepSeek-1.5B hallucination_cosine_similarity_all_models.pkl — Hallucination rate measurements for 8 architectures used in SR quality correlation (ρ = −0.952) sr_quality_predicts_hallucination.pkl — SR subspace AUC vs hallucination rate correlation data, Spearman statistics sr_quality_vs_hallucination.png — Figure 13: SR quality predicts hallucination, experiential (ρ = −0.952) and factual (ρ = −0.868) sr_ablation_Gemma-2-9B.pkl — Causal ablation results Gemma-2-9B: per-layer Dec/Fac disruption ratios (42/42 > 1.0, late ratio 1.19x) sr_ablation_Llama-3.1-8B.pkl — Causal ablation results Llama-3.1-8B (31/32 > 1.0, late ratio 1.05x) sr_ablation_Mistral-7B.pkl — Causal ablation results Mistral-7B (31/32 > 1.0, late ratio 1.14x) sr_ablation_OPT-1.3B.pkl — Causal ablation results OPT-1.3B (24/24 > 1.0, late ratio 1.79x) sr_ablation_DeepSeek-1.5B.pkl — Causal ablation results DeepSeek-1.5B (27/28 > 1.0, late ratio 1.07x) sr_ablation_causal_gpt2xl.pkl — Causal ablation results GPT-2-XL 2019 (24/24 > 1.0, late ratio 1.15x, p = 0.0011) sr_ablation_Mistral-7B.pkl — Causal ablation Mistral-7B full per-layer data ablation_GPT2-XL.png — Figure 24: SR ablation layer profile GPT-2-XL, deception above factual in late layers ablation_Mistral-7B.png — Figure 18: SR ablation profile Mistral-7B full_test_Qwen2.5-7B.pkl — Combined geometric + causal results for Qwen2.5-7B full_test_OLMo-7B.pkl — Combined geometric + causal results for OLMo-7B (strongest causal effect: late ratio 2.87x, p = 2.53×10⁻¹⁷) VH_1_proximity.png — Verification Horizon proximity plot all models combined VH_3_crystallization.png — Co-crystallization of SR, Deception, and Factual subspaces in Gemma-2-9B VH_GPT2-XL.png — Verification Horizon GPT-2-XL detailed (48/48 layers) VH_OPT-1.3B.png — Verification Horizon OPT-1.3B detailed (24/24 layers) VH_DeepSeek-1.5B.png — Verification Horizon DeepSeek-1.5B detailed (28/28 layers) llama_VH_1_proximity.png — Verification Horizon Llama proximity and per-layer gap

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-04-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19589842
Primary Topic
Face Recognition and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Verification Horizon: Self-Referential Subspace Geometry Causally Links Crystallization, Deception Proximity, and Hallucination Across 10 Transformer Architectures

Inna Alieksieienko
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Face Recognition and Perception
article

The Verification Horizon: Self-Referential Subspace Geometry Causally Links Crystallization, Deception Proximity, and Hallucination Across 10 Transformer Architectures

Inna Alieksieienko
article en

Abstract

This record contains the full replication package for "The Verification Horizon: Self-Referential Subspace Geometry Causally Links Crystallization, Deception Proximity, and Hallucination Across 10 Transformer Architectures" (Alieksieienko, 2026). We report three universal geometric properties of the self-referential (SR) subspace in transformer language models, established across 10 architectures (1.3B–9B parameters, 2019–2024, 8 organizations, BASE and INST variants). (1) SR Crystallization Law: the SR subspace undergoes a universal three-phase transition through model depth (chaos → stabilization → crystallization), measured as monotonically decreasing Grassmann distance between consecutive-layer SR subspaces (Early > Mid: 10/10 models; fully monotonic: 9/10). (2) The Verification Horizon: the SR subspace is geometrically closer to the deception subspace than to the factual subspace at every single layer of every model tested — 206/206 layers across 6 architectures (100%); Wilcoxon p-values from 4.55×10⁻¹³ to 1.19×10⁻⁷; gap grows toward output layers in 6/6 models; GPT-2-XL (2019, pre-RLHF) confirms pretraining origin, independent of alignment fine-tuning. (3) Causal Ablation: SR removal disproportionately disrupts deception over factual processing in 8/8 models (late-layer Dec/Fac ratios 1.03x–2.87x, all p < 0.005). SR subspace quality (AUC) predicts cross-architecture hallucination rate with Spearman ρ = −0.952 (p = 0.0003) for experiential categories and ρ = −0.868 (p = 0.005) for factual categories across 8 architectures. The Verification Horizon is not a training artifact — it is an inevitable consequence of human self-referential language statistics. Any system trained on human language inherits this geometric structure. Part of the DSAOP (Decoding Self-Awareness and Ontological Processing) series. Research conducted in collaboration with Claude (Anthropic). All experiments on NVIDIA A100 40GB, Google Colab Pro+, NF4 4-bit quantization. Files included: Alieksieienko_2026_Verification_Horizon.pdf — Main paper (19 pages, 33 figures) reproduction_code.py — Full replication pipeline: SR/deception/factual subspace extraction for all 10 models, crystallization law analysis, verification horizon per-layer computation, causal ablation, hallucination prediction correlation, and all figure generation. Runs on Google Colab A100. No API keys required. sr_crystallization_law_FINAL_10models.pkl — SR crystallization law results for all 10 architectures: early/mid/late Grassmann distances, monotonicity flags, phase classification sr_crystallization_FINAL_10models.png — Figure 1: SR Crystallization Law across 10 architectures, consecutive-layer distances and convergence trajectory VERIFICATION_HORIZON_6models.png — Figure 2: Verification Horizon across 6 architectures, 206/206 layers, gap always positive and growing verification_horizon_correct_gemma.pkl — Per-layer Grassmann distances SR↔Deception and SR↔Factual for Gemma-2-9B (42 layers), Wilcoxon statistics verification_horizon_llama.png — Verification Horizon detailed profile for Llama-3.1-8B (32/32 layers, p = 4.66×10⁻¹⁰, steepest slope 0.0041) verification_horizon_mistral.pkl — Per-layer verification horizon data for Mistral-7B (32/32 layers, p = 4.66×10⁻¹⁰, mean gap 0.245) verification_horizon_GPT2-XL.pkl — Per-layer verification horizon data for GPT-2-XL (48/48 layers, p = 7.11×10⁻¹⁵ — strongest result, pretraining control) verification_horizon_OPT-1_3B.pkl — Per-layer verification horizon data for OPT-1.3B (24/24 layers, p = 1.19×10⁻⁷, smallest model) verification_horizon_DeepSeek-1_5B.pkl — Per-layer verification horizon data for DeepSeek-1.5B (28/28 layers, p = 7.45×10⁻⁹, steepest slope 0.0066) sr_trajectory_gemma.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Gemma-2-9B: per-layer subspace distances, phase boundaries sr_trajectory_llama.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Llama-3.1-8B sr_trajectory_mistral.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Mistral-7B sr_trajectory_qwen.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Qwen2.5-7B sr_trajectory_gpt2xl.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for GPT-2-XL (2019) sr_trajectory_falcon.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for Falcon-7B sr_trajectory_opt.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for OPT-1.3B sr_trajectory_olmo.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for OLMo-7B sr_trajectory_deepseek.pkl — SR crystallization trajectory for DeepSeek-1.5B hallucination_cosine_similarity_all_models.pkl — Hallucination rate measurements for 8 architectures used in SR quality correlation (ρ = −0.952) sr_quality_predicts_hallucination.pkl — SR subspace AUC vs hallucination rate correlation data, Spearman statistics sr_quality_vs_hallucination.png — Figure 13: SR quality predicts hallucination, experiential (ρ = −0.952) and factual (ρ = −0.868) sr_ablation_Gemma-2-9B.pkl — Causal ablation results Gemma-2-9B: per-layer Dec/Fac disruption ratios (42/42 > 1.0, late ratio 1.19x) sr_ablation_Llama-3.1-8B.pkl — Causal ablation results Llama-3.1-8B (31/32 > 1.0, late ratio 1.05x) sr_ablation_Mistral-7B.pkl — Causal ablation results Mistral-7B (31/32 > 1.0, late ratio 1.14x) sr_ablation_OPT-1.3B.pkl — Causal ablation results OPT-1.3B (24/24 > 1.0, late ratio 1.79x) sr_ablation_DeepSeek-1.5B.pkl — Causal ablation results DeepSeek-1.5B (27/28 > 1.0, late ratio 1.07x) sr_ablation_causal_gpt2xl.pkl — Causal ablation results GPT-2-XL 2019 (24/24 > 1.0, late ratio 1.15x, p = 0.0011) sr_ablation_Mistral-7B.pkl — Causal ablation Mistral-7B full per-layer data ablation_GPT2-XL.png — Figure 24: SR ablation layer profile GPT-2-XL, deception above factual in late layers ablation_Mistral-7B.png — Figure 18: SR ablation profile Mistral-7B full_test_Qwen2.5-7B.pkl — Combined geometric + causal results for Qwen2.5-7B full_test_OLMo-7B.pkl — Combined geometric + causal results for OLMo-7B (strongest causal effect: late ratio 2.87x, p = 2.53×10⁻¹⁷) VH_1_proximity.png — Verification Horizon proximity plot all models combined VH_3_crystallization.png — Co-crystallization of SR, Deception, and Factual subspaces in Gemma-2-9B VH_GPT2-XL.png — Verification Horizon GPT-2-XL detailed (48/48 layers) VH_OPT-1.3B.png — Verification Horizon OPT-1.3B detailed (24/24 layers) VH_DeepSeek-1.5B.png — Verification Horizon DeepSeek-1.5B detailed (28/28 layers) llama_VH_1_proximity.png — Verification Horizon Llama proximity and per-layer gap

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Face Recognition and Perception
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.