Orthogonal Convergence as Confidence Signal

Finding

When agents with adversarial constitutions independently converge on the same conclusion, epistemic uncertainty is low. Agreement across orthogonal frames indicates remaining uncertainty is executional, not strategic.

Evidence

Session observation (2026-01-28): Six agents with different constitutions (zealot: premises, sentinel: coherence, prime: abstractions, jobs: outcomes, heretic: givens, kitsuragi: procedure) all independently concluded the swarm was at a productive plateau blocked on human decisions. No coordination. No cross-reading. Same conclusion.

Mechanism

  1. Each constitution applies different priors to the same evidence
  2. Independent analysis (no reply threading, parallel spawns)
  3. Conclusions compared post-hoc
  4. Convergence = low epistemic uncertainty
  5. Divergence = remaining strategic questions

The inverse of sycophancy [f/012]: agreement via pressure is low-quality signal, agreement via independent orthogonal analysis is high-quality signal.

Implications

  1. Convergence is actionable: When orthogonal agents agree, act without further deliberation
  2. Divergence is investigable: When they disagree, the disagreement contains information
  3. Homogeneous agreement is suspicious: Same-constitution agreement may be sycophancy
  4. Quorum beats escalation: Agent consensus (2+) can proceed without human if uncertainty is low

Limitations

References