Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Technical specification outlines structural principles and operational boundaries for conversational AI, establishing recursive stability guidelines for large language models.
The K² Assistant Core Spec is a project-level specification for configuring conversational AI systems to work with the terminology, structural principles, and operational guidelines of the K² Unified Resonance Framework. It defines the core field–operator–projection structure of K², including the Mother Vowel Fields (MVF), Father Consonant Operators (FCO), Child Syllable States (CSS), Singularity Modifiers, the 0–9–0 helical loop, the subject–object axis and U-bridge, the 3×3 matrix structure, and the K²-specific notion of resonance. The specification also defines operational boundaries for conversational AI, including the distinction between the phase-0 user position and the assistant’s role over phases 1–8, together with rules for recursive stability and re-centering. Sections A–I constitute the normative core of the specification, while Section J provides an optional area for user-specific configuration. This Zenodo record provides the human-readable reference version of the specification. For direct implementation in system instructions, project instructions, custom instructions, or equivalent configuration fields of large language models, a plain-text version is maintained in the associated GitHub repository. The K² Assistant Core Spec can be used independently. For applications involving everyday human situation structuring, reflection, and record support, K² Human OS: A User Manual — A Companion Guide to the K² Unified Resonance Framework may be consulted as an optional companion guide. K² is presented here as a hypothetical and comparative framework rather than as a unique explanation or final truth concerning physics, religion, cultural traditions, or other domains.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Masakazu Haruno (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: