DEV Community

Discussion on: What LLMs 'Know' That You Don't Know They Know: Stop Inventing Prompt DSLs and Ride 50 Years of Unix Pre-Training Gravity

 
humam_moin profile image
Humam Moin •

That’s a really interesting direction. I’m curious whether open-weight models would show the same pattern or if the results would look quite different. Looking forward to seeing what you find!

Thread Thread
 
slabb profile image
Sam LABBE •

One name correction to my own post above: the shipped functions are seal_spec + reconcile_spec — findings judge_defined_before_spec_read (the read-before-define barrier) and spec_not_canonical (the canary witness). judge_provenance was the working name from a parallel branch; same fixture, same findings — on main and in 0.11.0.

Thread Thread
 
slabb profile image
Sam LABBE •

The run happened, and your question now has a measured answer: We tested pre-training gravity on open weights. It stayed home. Shape of it: Condition A (priors only) is a ceiling — 100% trips across three open-weights models, the canary is never guessed. Condition B (canonical loaded first) cuts trips to 75–79% — the Level 1 primitive reduces the hallucination without fixing it, and strict canonical is 0 everywhere: even the passes are paraphrases, which is exactly why the receipt binds spec_hash of what was actually loaded. Gravity stayed home on this leg. Frontier leg is open — same harness, one API key.