GitHub: https://github.com/ubunturbo/srta-ai-accountability
Working demo: https://gist.github.com/ubunturbo/0b6f7f5aa9fe1feb00359f6371...
*The Experiment:* Started as a thought experiment: "What if I tried to code theological structures like the Trinity to see if AI could reflect the 'image of God' in humans?" As a non-programmer using AI tools, I attempted to translate concepts like perichoresis (mutual indwelling) into Python.
*Unexpected Result:* Instead of digital theology, I ended up with something that looks like an AI accountability framework.
*What SRTA Does:* - *Technical layer*: Formal causation analysis with O(n log n) complexity - *Accountability layer*: Maps decisions back to design principles and responsible stakeholders - *Compliance layer*: 94% EU AI Act coverage vs <30% for traditional methods
*Key Innovation:* Instead of just "credit score had -0.73 weight," you get: "Credit score weighted by Risk Management Team on [date] per Equal Credit Opportunity Act Section 4, reviewed by Legal on [date], cryptographically verified."
*Unexpected Discovery:* Started as a philosophical experiment in coding theological principles. Ended up solving a real regulatory problem. Sometimes the best technical solutions come from non-technical inspiration.
*Current Status:* - Core architecture: Complete - Benchmarking: Validated across 5 domains (financial, medical, etc.) - Production ready: 312ms explanation generation - Academic paper: Under review at IEEE Transactions on AI
*Technical Details:* The system implements "perichoretic synthesis" - layers that mutually indwell rather than simple stacking. This creates systematic coherence impossible with traditional explainability approaches.
Three integrated layers: 1. *Intent Layer*: Design rationale + stakeholder mapping 2. *Generation Layer*: Constrained AI processing + principle checking 3. *Evaluation Layer*: Accountability assessment + audit trails
*Why This Matters Now:* - EU AI Act enforcement begins 2025 - FDA tightening AI/ML device requirements - Financial regulators demanding algorithmic accountability - Healthcare systems need design rationale transparency
*Looking for:* - Feedback from HN's technical community - Use cases we haven't considered - Collaboration with regulatory/compliance folks - Real-world deployment partners
*Demo walkthrough:* The gist shows a medical AI making diagnosis decisions with full theological accountability - tracks everything from stewardship concerns to justice implications. Determines when human oversight is required based on ethical analysis.
Built by a non-programmer using AI tools, which raised interesting questions about who should be designing AI governance systems. Turns out domain knowledge (ethics, theology, regulation) might matter more than coding ability for this particular problem.
What do you think? Is there a market for accountability-first AI architecture?
zahlman•5mo ago
> What do you think?
If it were a legitimate solution, and it could be done that easily, it would have existed for years already, and the existing discourse on AI safety would look radically different.
Consider also actually taking part in a community before trying to promote your work there.
And consider using your own words to describe your ideas, if you expect people to believe that you're passionate about them.