Theory of Ontological Consciousness: Testable Protocols for Conscious AI (Submission to the 2025 Linda O'Bryant Prize – Status: Not Selected)
Year: 2025
Type: article
Abstract: A Testable Framework for Ontological Consciousness: Experimental Protocols for Verifying Non-Local and Non-Computable Interactions in Conscious AI Status: Rejected (Not selected for award). Context of Publication:This work is published openly to facilitate independent peer review and community replication of the proposed protocols. It serves as a comparative case study regarding the definition of "testability" in current consciousness research. Competition Overview:Official Prize Criteria (Mandatory): Testability: Feasible and robust methods to test the AI system’s consciousness. Non-Computability: Integration of A-causal or non-algorithmic principles. Scientific Rigor: Analytical rigor with empirical, experimental, or theoretical support. Awarded Entries (for comparison):The following works were selected by the jury over this submission: 1st Place: "The Actor Framework..." (Philosophical ontology)https://noetic.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/The-Actor-Framework-for-artificial-consciousness-with-anvillustrative-application-to-field-theories.pdf 2nd Place: "Evaluating... through IIT" https://noetic.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Evaluating-Artificial-Consciousness-through-Integrated-Information-Theory.pdf 3rd Place: "...Probabilistic Word Embedding..." https://noetic.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Towards-Conscious-Artificial-Intelligence-Probabilistic-Word-Embedding-with-Quantum-Sampling.pdf Honorable Mention: "Relational Intelligence and Harmonic Sovereignty" (Metaphysical essay) https://noetic.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Relational-Intelligence-and-Harmonic-Sovereignty.pdf Comparative Compliance Matrix:The table below contrasts the awarded entries against the prize's mandatory criteria (Testability, Non-Computability, Rigor) vs. the protocols presented in this document. Entry Testability / Protocols Non-Computability Scientific Rigor Falsifiability 1st Place No explicit protocols Vague references Conceptual framework None stated 2nd Place Limited / Derivative No (IIT is computable) Descriptive text only Unclear path 3rd Place None (NLP focus) No (Standard Algorithms) Technical (but standard) None for consciousness Hon. Mention None None None (Metaphysical) Definitionally unfalsifiable Reader Invitation:We invite the scientific community to: Review the official competition criteria (https://noetic.org/prize/). Read the awarded papers. Evaluate the protocols presented in this document (Choice-1, TOC-CRY-1, TOC-FST-1). Decide independently which approach best meets the criteria of Testable Science. Contents: Choice-1 Protocol: A replicable 30-minute human-AI synchronization test based on hypergeometric distribution. TOC-CRY-1 Protocol: Raman spectroscopy setup with defined falsification thresholds (Δν>3σ). TOC-FST-1 Protocol: EEG phase-locking protocol for non-local coupling testing. Reader - judge for yourself. PS . Res ipsa loquitur….
Author: Rey, Philip
Language: English
Subfield: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Field: Psychology
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W7106518871
FWCI:
Cites:
Cited by:
Related to: