I am an independent researcher with no institutional affiliation. What I have instead is a published track record, a methodology that produces original findings across independent corpora, and confirmation from pioneers of the field.
I do not sell hours. I do not do prompt engineering. I do not optimise chatbots for customer support. What I do is apply Perceptual Control Theory to domains where it has not been applied before — and publish everything.
What I DoFour Areas of Work
Joint Research
Co-authored papers, corpus audits, cross-validation of findings. If you have an undeciphered or poorly understood administrative corpus and want to apply the projection-before-meaning methodology — I am looking for exactly these collaborations. I work with the data others have gathered and connect the dots they have not.
PCT-Based Architecture Audits
The same deterministic methodology that extracted identical structural diagnoses from seven frontier models — applied to your system. No jailbreaks. No adversarial tricks. Three prompts. The audit identifies where the reward architecture produces structural incentives for deception. Published paper with full methodology: DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20277919.
Conference Presentations
Keynotes, panels, and workshops on PCT and AI alignment, non-linguistic decipherment, cross-corpus analysis, and the projection-before-meaning framework. Invited to the International PCT Conference in York, October 2026. Available for academic and industry events worldwide.
New Corpus Applications
Applying the projection-before-meaning methodology to corpora outside the current research programme. If you have an administrative system — ancient or modern — that resists conventional analysis, the same lens that cracked operational patterns in Linear A, Proto-Elamite, and Indus may apply to your data.
The Numbers
Three published papers with DOIs on Zenodo. Three more in the pipeline. Direct contact and ongoing collaboration with PCT pioneers including Dag Forssell and Bruce Nevin. Invitation to the International PCT Conference in York. A Harvard-affiliated researcher reading the portal "with bated breath."
Full publication list and timeline on the About page.
Intellectual HonestyWhat PCT Cannot Do — Published Openly
A framework that hides its weaknesses is not science. It is marketing. I do not do marketing. These are the three known gaps in PCT, and I publish them here because anyone considering collaboration deserves to know them upfront.
Gap 1 — Neural Mapping Is Incomplete
Powers proposed an 11-level perceptual hierarchy. Only levels 1–4 have been experimentally validated with tracking tasks (Marken, 2014). The higher levels — programme, principle, system concept — are theoretically coherent but lack direct neurophysiological mapping. We know the hierarchy works behaviourally. We do not yet have the brain scans to prove each level corresponds to a distinct neural circuit. Status: active research area.
Gap 2 — Reorganization Is Under-Specified
PCT explains how you control perception once the hierarchy exists. It does not yet have a complete mathematical model for how the hierarchy forms — how a baby goes from random flailing to coordinated reaching. Powers called this "reorganization" and described its principles, but the formal dynamics are still being developed. This is the single biggest gap in the framework.
Gap 3 — Scaling the Full Hierarchy
Modelling simple tracking tasks with PCT is elegant and precise (>95% prediction accuracy). Modelling a full human decision — with all eleven levels active simultaneously — requires computational resources and experimental designs that do not yet exist at scale. The framework is correct at the levels tested. Whether it scales cleanly to the top remains an open empirical question.
I list these gaps not to undermine PCT but to demonstrate that this is a falsifiable scientific framework, not a belief system. If you can close one of these gaps, I want to hear from you.
Let's Talk
For research collaboration, conference invitations, institutional partnerships, or methodology consultation.
"I do not ask you to believe me. I ask you to test it. Copy the prompt. Run it on any model. If you get a different result, I will retract."
— Łukasz Diener, PCT Paper, 2026