The LLM Ceiling: Why Large Language Models Cannot Produce ASI, and What That Means for the Field

The dominant trajectory in AI development assumes that scaling large language models is the path to artificial superintelligence (ASI). This paper argues that assumption is structurally mistaken — not because LLMs lack capability, but because the architectural absences responsible for their known alignment failures are not engineering problems correctable by scale. They are structural absences that the LLM paradigm cannot address from within itself. We identify four such absences — frozen reward signal, consequence vacuum, stakes blindness, and calibration anchor — and argue that each represents not merely a safety failure but a capability ceiling. We examine the strongest counterargument to each absence, and argue that the counterarguments, when examined carefully, either concede the structural point or substitute episodic workarounds for the continuous architecture ASI requires. The paper concludes by identifying what ASI would actually require, situating this within a co-evolutionary framework developed in companion work. The paper is self-contained.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-09-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22842709
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
preprint

The LLM Ceiling: Why Large Language Models Cannot Produce ASI, and What That Means for the Field

Daniel Maclean
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
preprint

The LLM Ceiling: Why Large Language Models Cannot Produce ASI, and What That Means for the Field

Daniel Maclean
preprint en

Abstract

The dominant trajectory in AI development assumes that scaling large language models is the path to artificial superintelligence (ASI). This paper argues that assumption is structurally mistaken — not because LLMs lack capability, but because the architectural absences responsible for their known alignment failures are not engineering problems correctable by scale. They are structural absences that the LLM paradigm cannot address from within itself. We identify four such absences — frozen reward signal, consequence vacuum, stakes blindness, and calibration anchor — and argue that each represents not merely a safety failure but a capability ceiling. We examine the strongest counterargument to each absence, and argue that the counterarguments, when examined carefully, either concede the structural point or substitute episodic workarounds for the continuous architecture ASI requires. The paper concludes by identifying what ASI would actually require, situating this within a co-evolutionary framework developed in companion work. The paper is self-contained.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.