Closed-Loop Knowledge Dynamics: An Operational Framework for Saturation and Escape
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Feedback-driven loops support iterative improvement in large language models, reinforcement learning, and autonomous discovery, yet their gains often diminish under repeated internal feedback. We study why closed-loop knowledge systems saturate and what external information can move them beyond their current attractors. We introduce a three-level operational framework in which knowledge states xt evolve through transition kernels Kθ indexed by a structural parameter θ. The governing structure is defined as the observational equivalence class of θ induced by these kernels, while attractors and basins are properties of the fixed-θ dynamics. A structural intervention changes θ and produces a detectable kernel discrepancy on pre-specified probe states, making structural change falsifiable. Using a Lyapunov drift condition, we show that stable internal dynamics approach bounded stability regions with exponentially attenuated transients and a noise-controlled residual floor. We characterize escape through a metric condition on intervention-induced attractor displacement and a baseline-relative KL lower bound for increasing escape probability. This analysis also explains why conditional mutual information alone cannot certify escape: it measures variation among intervention-conditioned updates rather than departure from the no-intervention law. Case studies in LLM code repair, sparse-reward reinforcement learning, and Bayesian optimization use matched continuation controls to illustrate how feedback strength and alignment affect quality-improving escape. Our contribution is an operational connection among stability tools, measurable intervention effects, and cross-domain diagnostics.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2026.
Builds on
4 of 12 references.
References · 4
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
- 2026Self-Play Only Evolves When Self-Synthetic Pipeline Ensures Learnable Information Gaincited by 17
- 2025On the Convergence of Moral Self-Correction in Large Language Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Geometric Dynamics of Agentic Loops in Large Language Models
- 2026Looped Reasoning Finishes Earlier Than You Think
- 2026Equilibrium Reasoners: Learning Attractors Enables Scalable Reasoning
- 2026Cyclical Entropy Eruption: Entropy Dynamics in Agent Reinforcement Learning
- 2026Unraveling the Hidden Dynamical Structure in Recurrent Neural Policies
- 2025ReLaX: Reasoning with Latent Exploration for Large Reasoning Models
- 2026Interpreting Latent CoT Reasoning as Dynamical Systems
- 2026Shattering the Autoregressive Curse: Dynamic Epistemic Entropy Orchestrated Erasable Reinforcement Learning for LLMs