Structured Intent as a Protocol-Like Communication Layer: Cross-Model Robustness, Framework Comparison, and the Weak-Model Compensation Effect
How reliably can structured intent representations preserve user goals across different AI models, languages, and prompting frameworks? Prior work showed that PPS (Prompt Protocol Specification), a 5W3H-based structured intent framework, improves goal alignment in Chinese and generalizes to English and Japanese. This paper extends that line of inquiry in three directions: cross-model robustness across Claude, GPT-4o, and Gemini 2.5 Pro; controlled comparison with CO-STAR and RISEN; and a user st
Record details
Published: 31 March 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Safety & alignment
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Peer-Preservation in Frontier Models
arXiv · 30 March 2026
The Topology of Multimodal Fusion: Why Current Architectures Fail at Creative Cognition
arXiv · 6 April 2026
The Granularity Gap: A Multi-Dimensional Longitudinal Audit of Sycophancy in Gemini Models
arXiv · 19 April 2026
Cognitive Alignment At No Cost: Inducing Human Attention Biases For Interpretable Vision Transformers
arXiv · 21 April 2026
Leveraging Multimodal LLMs for Built Environment and Housing Attribute Assessment from Street-View Imagery
arXiv · 22 April 2026
Mind the Gap: Pitfalls of LLM Alignment with Asian Public Opinion
arXiv · 6 March 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (31 March 2026), “Structured Intent as a Protocol-Like Communication Layer: Cross-Model Robustness, Framework Comparison, and the Weak-Model Compensation Effect,” evidence record 6534, https://ethics.ai/record/6534 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.