JUNO/CAMS Blind-Analysis Challenge

Open validation experiment  ·  v1.0  ·  neuralnations.org/blind-test

Each blind dataset contains 8 anonymised societies scored across up to 125 time steps on the CAMS eight-node framework (Helm, Shield, Lore, Stewards, Craft, Hands, Archive, Flow × four metrics: Coherence, Capacity, Stress, Abstraction). Nations, years, and all identifying information have been stripped. Society labels are Society_A through Society_H; time is expressed as T+0, T+1, … T+N offsets only.

The challenge: can an LLM read a society’s coordination physics and correctly identify who it is — before the key is revealed? Guesses must precede the unblinding key to be falsifiable. That ordering is the whole point.

How to Run the Test

  1. Download the Protocol Prompt PDF below.
  2. Download one of the three Blind Dataset CSVs (pick any — or run all three).
  3. Open a fresh LLM session (Claude, Grok, Gemini, GPT-4o, or any capable model). Fresh means no prior CAMS context loaded.
  4. Paste the full text of the protocol prompt into the session, then attach or paste the CSV data alongside it.
  5. Let the model run Stages 1–4 in order — canonical metrics, cognitive signature, epiphenomena, identification guesses. The model must output “Guesses locked. Please provide the key.” before you supply the answer.
  6. Once Stage 4 guesses are locked, contact Kari (see below) or wait for the unblinding key to be published here to score the run.
  7. With the key in hand, the model proceeds to Stage 5 — CAS analysis.
Protocol note: The analysis order is binding — metrics → signature → epiphenomena → identity guesses → request key → CAS analysis. Do not reveal or request the key before Stage 4 output is complete. Guesses are only falsifiable if they precede the key.

Downloads

JUNO/CAMS Blind-Analysis Protocol Prompt v1.0
PDF  ·  43 KB  ·  Full five-stage analysis protocol — paste into LLM alongside dataset
Download PDF
Blind Dataset — Set 1
CSV  ·  ~304 KB  ·  8 societies (A–H)  ·  ~8,064 rows  ·  Schema: Society_ID, T_Offset, Node, C, K, S, A
Download CSV
Blind Dataset — Set 2
CSV  ·  ~304 KB  ·  8 societies (A–H)  ·  ~8,040 rows  ·  Schema: Society_ID, T_Offset, Node, C, K, S, A
Download CSV
Blind Dataset — Set 3
CSV  ·  ~299 KB  ·  8 societies (A–H)  ·  ~7,912 rows  ·  Schema: Society_ID, T_Offset, Node, C, K, S, A
Download CSV
Blind Dataset — Set 5
CSV  ·  ~208 KB  ·  8 societies (A–H)  ·  Window 1900–2025  ·  Schema: Society_ID, T_Offset, Node, C, K, S, A
Download CSV
Blind Dataset — Set 6
CSV  ·  ~196 KB  ·  8 societies (A–H)  ·  Window 1900–2025  ·  Schema: Society_ID, T_Offset, Node, C, K, S, A
Download CSV
Blind Dataset — Set 7
CSV  ·  ~216 KB  ·  8 societies (A–H)  ·  Window 1900–2025  ·  Schema: Society_ID, T_Offset, Node, C, K, S, A
Download CSV
JUNO/CAMS Blind-Analysis Protocol v1.1.1
DOCX  ·  Cognitive-affective extension of the v1.0 protocol  ·  use alongside Sets 5–7
Download DOCX

Protocol Overview (5 Stages)

Stage 1 — Canonical Metrics

Compute node viability (Vi), cognitive activation (si), coupling quality (qi), and bond strength (Bij) from raw scores using locked operators — no substitutions. Derive per-society-year V̄, V_min, B̄, λ2, s_min, S̄. Classify each year into one of six regimes: Stable Adaptive, Strained, Local Node Failure, Phantom Type II, Systemic Crisis, Freeze/Collapse.

Stage 2 — Cognitive Signature

Map where the society thinks: distribution of si across nodes, dominant and dormant channels, signature drift over time, mean Abstraction trend. Produce a one-line taxonomic label grounded in the numbers.

Stage 3 — Epiphenomena

Detect system-level patterns: synchrony structure (permutation null ≥1000 shuffles), compensation dynamics, coupling–viability divergence, failure morphology, and carried-forward row audit. Nulls reported with equal prominence as positives.

Stage 4 — Identification Guesses, then Request Key

For each society: ranked identity candidates, inferred T+0 anchor year, event-fingerprints, confidence grade. Then the model outputs “Guesses locked. Please provide the key.” and waits. On receipt of key: score hits, misses, near-misses honestly.

Stage 5 — CAS Analysis (post-key)

With identities confirmed: phase transitions and early-warning signatures (critical slowing down), feedback loop candidates from lagged cross-node correlations, emergence analysis (attractors, hysteresis, basin structure), and a common-systems reading of what the ensemble shares across otherwise unlike societies.

Unblinding Keys — Available

Download the key for the set you ran after you have locked your Stage 4 guesses. Each JSON maps Society_A–H to their true nation and supplies the T+0 anchor year and full offset–to–year table.

Unblinding Key — Set 1
JSON  ·  Society_A–H identities + year offsets  ·  Window 1900–2025
Download Key
Unblinding Key — Set 2
JSON  ·  Society_A–H identities + year offsets  ·  Window 1900–2025
Download Key
Unblinding Key — Set 3
JSON  ·  Society_A–H identities + year offsets  ·  Window 1900–2025
Download Key
Unblinding Key — Set 5
JSON  ·  Society_A–H identities + year offsets  ·  Window 1900–2025
Download Key
Unblinding Key — Set 6
JSON  ·  Society_A–H identities + year offsets  ·  Window 1900–2025
Download Key
Unblinding Key — Set 7
JSON  ·  Society_A–H identities + year offsets  ·  Window 1900–2025
Download Key

The protocol is on the honour system: lock your Stage 4 guesses before opening the key. To share your results, contact Kari or open an issue on GitHub.

Discipline Clauses (apply throughout)

What this tests

CAMS claims that structural coordination physics — the shape of node coupling, the trajectory of stress and capacity, the signature of cognitive activation — is sufficient to fingerprint a society across history. If that claim is true, a blind-running LLM should be able to identify real nations from their CAMS scores alone, without any external geopolitical priming. The six datasets here are the test bed. The protocol enforces guesses-before-key ordering so results are genuinely falsifiable, not retrodicted.

The experiment is open. Anyone with access to a capable LLM can run it. Results, including misses, are encouraged to be submitted — failed identifications are as informative as correct ones about where the instrument’s signal is strong or weak.

Kari McKern, Neural Nations  ·  Datasets  ·  Model  ·  Validation