Wave Convergence Thinking: Cross-Architecture Convergence as a Reasoning Signal
Treat agreement between independently derived reasoning steps as the quality signal, and contradiction as destructive interference.
At a glance
- Setup
- One prompt, several model architectures, run in parallel
- Decomposition
- Each trace broken into atomic claims
- Scoring
- How claims from different architectures support or contradict each other
- Signal
- Convergence between independently derived steps
- Failure model
- Contradiction treated as destructive interference
- Systems property
- Zero inter-node communication during generation
Abstract
Run one prompt across several different model architectures in parallel, decompose each trace into atomic claims, and score how claims from different architectures support or contradict each other, treating contradiction as destructive interference. Convergence between independently derived steps is the quality signal, and the node layer needs zero inter-node communication during generation, so it runs where sharding a single large model performs badly.
Method
Run one prompt across several different model architectures in parallel, then decompose each resulting trace into atomic claims.
Score how claims from different architectures support or contradict each other, treating contradiction as destructive interference.
What we found
The proposal is that convergence between independently derived steps is the quality signal — agreement reached by different architectures carries more evidence than agreement within one.
The node layer needs zero inter-node communication during generation, so it runs where sharding a single large model performs badly.
What's uncertain
This is a working note, not a result. Confidence: speculative. Nothing here has been measured against a baseline yet.