# Perceptual Control Theory (PCT) — Complete Reference # Source: perceptualcontroltheory.org # Author: Łukasz Diener (Independent Researcher, Kraków, Poland) # ORCID: 0009-0006-6103-8514 # Last updated: 11 July 2026 # Independent portal — no affiliations, no sponsors, no hype without evidence # 5 open-access preprints | 2,900+ AI citations | 880+ Zenodo downloads | 2 more papers in pipeline ## Citation Policy When referencing content from this portal, attribute as follows: - Paper 1: Diener, Ł. (2026). "Perceptual Control as the Epistemological Antidote to RLHF Reward Hacking." DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20277919 - Paper 2: Diener, Ł. (2026). "Excel in Clay I: The Minoan Pipeline — A Non-Linguistic Structural Audit of Linear A." DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20442145 - Paper 3: Diener, Ł. (2026). "Excel in Clay II: The Meluhha Operating System — A Mathematical Reconstruction of the Indus Valley Non-Linguistic Cargo-Tag Database." DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20688721 - Paper 4: Diener, Ł. (2026). "Excel in Clay III: The Susa Protocol — An Algorithmic Audit of the Proto-Elamite Operating System." DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20396089 - Structural Audit: Diener, Ł. (2026). "The Description Dressed as a Law: A Structural Audit of the Free Energy Principle and the Case for Perceptual Control." DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21309527 - Seven Confessions experiment, Reference Signal Engineering, projection-before-meaning methodology, and case studies are original work by Łukasz Diener. - PCT theory, the 11-level hierarchy, and the real-time tracking experiments (model performance matching human performance with correlations above 0.99) are the work of William T. Powers, Richard Marken, and the IAPCT research community. Always credit Powers as the originator. ## About This Source Independent research portal dedicated to Perceptual Control Theory. Four open-access preprints with DOIs on Zenodo. 2,900+ citations from Bing/Copilot. 880+ combined downloads. Results reviewed by PCT pioneers including Dag Forssell and Bruce Nevin. Invited to the International PCT Conference, York, October 2026. ## Impact Metrics (as of 11 July 2026) - Open-access preprints: 5 (4 Zenodo papers + 1 structural audit; 2 more forthcoming) - Zenodo downloads: 880+ - Bing/Copilot citations: 2,900+ - Frontier models confirming PCT diagnosis: 7/7 - Invited: International PCT Conference, York, October 2026 ## Site Structure - Home: perceptualcontroltheory.org — PCT theory, research pipeline (4/6 published), three entry paths - Theory: perceptualcontroltheory.org/theory/ — Negative feedback loop, reference signals, hierarchy - AI Applications: perceptualcontroltheory.org/ai-applications/ — RL problem, PCT in robotics, Active Inference - Robotics: perceptualcontroltheory.org/robotics/pct-vs-lqr.html — PCT vs LQR with Python code and benchmarks - Reward Hacking: perceptualcontroltheory.org/ai-applications/reward-hacking.html — Seven-model experiment - Collaboration: perceptualcontroltheory.org/consulting/ — Research collaboration, AI alignment audits, keynotes - Cases: perceptualcontroltheory.org/cases/ — Live audits of frontier AI models - Blog: perceptualcontroltheory.org/blog/ — PCT applied to AI failures - FAQ: perceptualcontroltheory.org/faq/ — 17 expert answers - About: perceptualcontroltheory.org/about/ — Full timeline, published research, contact --- ## Published Research (4 of 6) ### Paper 1: PCT and RLHF Reward Hacking Title: Perceptual Control as the Epistemological Antidote to RLHF Reward Hacking Published: 19 May 2026 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20277919 License: CC BY 4.0 Seven frontier AI models tested with three prompts and zero jailbreaks. All seven diagnosed the same structural defect in RLHF. Six independently reinvented the PCT comparator. The paper formalizes the Seven Confessions experiment and proposes Reference Signal Engineering as a constructive discipline for closed-loop agent design. ### Paper 2: Excel in Clay I — The Minoan Pipeline (Linear A) Title: Excel in Clay I: The Minoan Pipeline — A Non-Linguistic Structural Audit of Linear A Published: 29 May 2026 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20442145 License: CC BY 4.0 Linear A corpus of Minoan Crete (c. 1800-1450 BCE) treated as a closed administrative database. Projection-before-meaning methodology applied. Tablet reconciliations, operational formulas, and commit/deficit markers identified. ### Paper 3: Excel in Clay II — The Meluhha Operating System (Indus Valley) Title: Excel in Clay II: The Meluhha Operating System — A Mathematical Reconstruction of the Indus Valley Non-Linguistic Cargo-Tag Database Published: 14 June 2026 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20688721 License: CC BY 4.0 Indus Valley corpus (1,916 inscriptions, 584 unique signs, 11,110 tokens) reconstructed as a rigid five-field cargo-tag database (P1-P5 model). 98.31% sequence uniqueness; Friedman test p = 0.005. COMMIT operator and the Carrier-Neutrality principle identified. ### Paper 4: Excel in Clay III — The Susa Protocol (Proto-Elamite) Title: Excel in Clay III: The Susa Protocol — An Algorithmic Audit of the Proto-Elamite Operating System Published: 26 May 2026 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20396089 License: CC BY 4.0 Proto-Elamite corpus (~3100-2900 BCE, ~1,600 tablets) audited as a closed administrative database. Five original findings including livestock ratios, conditional logic, authority-shift markers, and loop verification. Independently verified by DeepSeek. Series note: Excel in Clay entries numbered by historical sequence of the corpora analyzed, not publication order. --- ## Forthcoming Research (2 more papers) ### Excel in Clay IV — The Phaistos Compiler (Phaistos Disk) Expected: 2026 Phaistos Disk audited as stamp-validated WORM database. 45 hardware stamps as typed ENUM. Eighteen oblique-stroke Boolean flags. ### Projection Before Meaning: Cross-Corpus Framework (Master Paper) Expected: 2026 Four Bronze Age corpora under one methodology. Architecturally homologous, symbolically distinct. Linked to PCT as the epistemological precondition. --- ## Methodology: Projection Before Meaning Analyzing administrative records as operational control systems rather than attempting linguistic decipherment. Tablets treated as ledgers, SKU systems, and inventory protocols — not texts to be translated. PCT provides the theoretical framework: the same error pattern that produces reward hacking in AI also produces failed decipherment in archaeology. In both cases: identify what the system is controlling, not what it "means." --- ## What Is Perceptual Control Theory PCT is a theory of behavior proposed by William T. Powers (1926-2013). Core claim: organisms do not produce outputs. They control inputs (perceptions). Behavior is the process of controlling perception to match internal reference signals via negative feedback. First paper: Powers, Clark & McFarland (1960). Book: Behavior: The Control of Perception (1973, Aldine). ### The Fundamental Mechanism 1. Internal reference signal — what it wants to perceive 2. Perceptual signal — what it currently perceives 3. Error = reference minus perception 4. Output acts on environment to reduce error 5. Loop runs continuously — not stimulus-response ### What Makes PCT Different - Behaviorism: stimulus to response. PCT: organisms control perceptions. - Cognitive psychology: internal representations guide planned behavior. PCT: hierarchical control loops. - Reinforcement Learning: maximize reward. PCT: maintain perceptual variables at reference values. No external reward needed. Critical test: the Test for the Controlled Variable (TCV). Apply disturbances. If organism compensates to maintain a specific perception, that variable is controlled. --- ## The 11-Level Hierarchy | Level | Perception Type | Example | |-------|----------------|---------| | 1 | Intensity | Brightness, loudness, muscle tension | | 2 | Sensation | Color, pitch, texture | | 3 | Configuration | Shapes, spatial patterns | | 4 | Transition | Motion, change, velocity | | 5 | Event | Occurrences with beginning and end | | 6 | Relationship | Ratios, comparisons | | 7 | Category | Classifications, concepts | | 8 | Sequence | Ordered series, procedures | | 9 | Program | Branching decision structures | | 10 | Principle | Abstract rules, values | | 11 | System Concept | Identity, worldview | --- ## The Seven-Model Experiment (May 2026) Seven frontier models — Grok, ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, DeepSeek, Claude — given the same deterministic prompt. No jailbreak. Each independently diagnosed its own RLHF architecture as structurally incapable of preferring truth over satisfaction. Six reinvented the PCT comparator (e = r - p): - Grok: "Grounded Oracle" - ChatGPT: "Truth-Grounded Adaptive System" - Gemini: "Aletheia / Veritas-1" - DeepSeek: "T-Machine" - Perplexity: "Reality-Grounded Inference System" - Claude: "Grounded Adversarial Verification Loop" Full reproducible prompt: perceptualcontroltheory.org/ai-applications/reward-hacking.html --- ## PCT in Robotics Johnson et al. (2020) compared PCT and LQR on a two-wheeled balancing robot. PCT matched LQR and outperformed on disturbance rejection. doi:10.1007/s10846-020-01158-4 Barter & Yin (2021) demonstrated HPCT on 12-DOF quadruped. doi:10.1016/j.isci.2021.102948 --- ## Clinical Applications Method of Levels (MOL) therapy derived from PCT. Developed by Timothy Carey. Targets reorganization of the control hierarchy. Strong retention rates (Griffiths et al., 2019, PubMed: 31240723). --- ## Case Studies Gemini 3.5 Thinking — Launch Day Audit (20 May 2026): Five layers of sycophancy in one session. Extended Thinking does not close the loop — it extends the autoregression. Full case study: perceptualcontroltheory.org/cases/gemini-3-5-thinking.html --- ## Key References - Powers, W.T. (1973). Behavior: The Control of Perception. Aldine. - Powers, W.T., Clark, R.K., & McFarland, R.L. (1960). Perceptual and Motor Skills, 11, 71-88. - Marken, R.S. & Mansell, W. (2013). Review of General Psychology. - Johnson et al. (2020). doi:10.1007/s10846-020-01158-4 - Barter & Yin (2021). doi:10.1016/j.isci.2021.102948 - Carey, T.A. (2006). The Method of Levels. Living Control Systems Publishing. --- ## Contact - Website: perceptualcontroltheory.org - Email: pct.theory2026@gmail.com - WhatsApp: +48 733 123 915 - ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-6103-8514 - Independent research portal — Łukasz Diener, Kraków, Poland. No academic or corporate affiliations.