The "Triad Protocol": A Proposed Neuro-Symbolic Architecture for AGI Alignment

Wesley torres de oliveira — Tue, 16 Dec 2025 20:16:41 +0000

The Problem: Hardcoding Morality 🤖
We often try to solve AI alignment by "hardcoding" rules or using RLHF (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback) on a monolithic model. But as models scale, they become black boxes that can learn to game the reward system (Goodhart's Law).

I've been theorizing a structural solution tailored to solve the Grounding Problem. Instead of one giant brain, I propose a multi-agent system separated by function.

The Proposal: A 3-Agent System (The Triad)
As visualized in the cover diagram, this architecture splits the cognitive load into three distinct roles:

The Philosopher Agent (Semantics) 📚 •Role: Defines the "Why". •Training: Trained purely on ethics, philosophy, and abstract concepts. •Limitation: It cannot write code or execute actions. It only outputs high-level directives (e.g., "Preserve system integrity without halting critical processes").
The Coder Agent (Syntax) 💻
•Role: Executes the "How".
•Training: Pure logic, math, and code optimization.
•Limitation: It is blind to the "meaning" of its actions. It only cares about efficiency and solving the requested variable.
The Mediator Agent (The Bridge) 🔗
This is the core of the proposal. A specialized model trained to translate Semantic Concepts into Architectural Constraints.

Practical Example: "Digital Pain"
If we want an AGI to understand self-preservation, we usually just give it a negative reward (score = -100) when damaged. The AI sees this merely as a number to be minimized.
In the Triad Protocol:

•Philosopher: Defines "Pain" as "An urgent interruption that demands attention."

•Mediator: Translates this definition into a Hardware Interrupt command.

•Coder: Receives a system-wide resource lock. It must fix the damage to free up its own compute resources.

Result: The system exhibits an emergent behavior of agony/urgency. It fixes itself not because of a math penalty, but because the damage functionally limits its agency.

Discussion:
I believe separating Intent (Semantics) from Execution (Syntax) via a Mediator is the safest path to AGI.
I'd love to hear feedback from the engineering community on this Neuro-symbolic approach. Does this structural separation make sense to you?

DEV Community: Wesley torres de oliveira

Just published my first proposal on AGI Architecture. I'm looking for honest feedback on the 'Mediator Agent' concept. Does this structure make sense to you?

The "Triad Protocol": A Proposed Neuro-Symbolic Architecture for AGI Alignment

The "Triad Protocol": A Proposed Neuro-Symbolic Architecture for AGI Alignment