Tools, simulations, and system models for understanding agent behavior, ML trust, and intelligence alignment
This series collects my work on applied intelligence systems — where agents, models, governance layers, and system interpretation meet.
It includes prototypes, diagrams, and conceptual tools that explore how intelligent systems behave, drift, and make decisions under constraints.
My goal is to make intelligence legible — not as mysticism, but as system dynamics: signals, inputs, rules, constraints, interpretation layers, and trust boundaries.
Modern AI systems don’t fail because they are “wrong.”
They fail because their interpretation of the world drifts.
Intelligent systems rely on:
- coherent input meaning
- consistent interpretation layers
- governed decision constraints
- stable context windows
- predictable fallback behavior
- aligned signals between agents, models, and services
This series makes these invisible AI dynamics visible, allowing teams to reason about agent behavior, ML drift, governance logic, and system safety.
AI product failures rarely come from model accuracy alone — they come from misaligned behavior.
Clearer understanding of agent dynamics leads directly to:
- fewer hallucination-driven incidents
- safer agent autonomy in complex workflows
- stronger guardrails and governance layers
- reduced model drift across ML pipelines
- higher trust from stakeholders
- more predictable system behavior
These prototypes are not UX demos — they are system clarity tools that help PMs, engineers, and researchers align on how AI actually behaves at runtime.
Intelligent systems behave according to a structure — a shape of reasoning.
My architecture philosophy is grounded in three principles:
-
Interpretation is the real computation
Inputs are not facts; they are interpretations.
AI systems behave based on how they perceive, not how things “are.” -
Constraints shape behavior more than capabilities
Guardrails, policies, validation layers, and fallback logic determine what an agent actually does. -
Drift is inevitable — governance must be active
Models shift, inputs degrade, context collapses, rules conflict.
Systems stay trustworthy only when drift is monitored and corrected in real time.
This series expresses that philosophy through interactive tools that surface how AI systems think, drift, and adapt.
Planned essays on agent behavior, interpretation layers, system drift, and intelligent decision mechanics. (These essays are not yet written — titles represent upcoming work.)
- Why Interpretation Is the Real Computation
- Designing Agents That Don’t Misread the World
- When Rules Matter More Than Models
- The Hidden Drift in Multi-Agent Systems
- Fallback Logic as a Product Surface
| Prototype | Purpose | Live Demo | Repo |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent Behavior Sandbox | Explore how an agent interprets tasks, rules, and conflicting signals | https://rtfenter.github.io/Agent-Behavior-Sandbox/ | https://github.com/rtfenter/Agent-Behavior-Sandbox |
| Admin Rule Engine Playground | Test how admin-configured rules stack, conflict, and resolve | https://rtfenter.github.io/Admin-Rule-Engine/ | https://github.com/rtfenter/Admin-Rule-Engine |
| ML Input Drift Playground | Show how input inconsistency and drift affect model outputs | coming soon | coming soon |
| LLM Governance / Guardrail Visualizer | Visualize guardrails, validation layers, and policy logic | coming soon | coming soon |
| Model Decision Graph Viewer | Explore branching logic, constraints, and decision paths | coming soon | coming soon |
| Agent State Transition Map | Map tasks → states → errors → fallbacks → recovery | https://rtfenter.github.io/Agent-State-Transition-Map/ | https://github.com/rtfenter/Agent-State-Transition-Map |
[Input Signal]
|
v
[Preprocessing Layer]
- validation
- normalization
- drift detection
|
v
[Interpretation Engine]
- apply rules
- match patterns
- evaluate constraints
|
v
[Decision Layer]
- select behavior
- produce output
|
v
[Action Surface]
- downstream effects
- logged outcomes
|
v
[Feedback Loop]
- adjustments
- learning mechanisms
[Canonical Input Meaning]
|
-----------------------------------------
| | |
v v v
[Model A] [Agent B] [Service C]
(LLM) (Policy Agent) (Inference API)
Drift Examples:
- Model A interprets "priority" as urgency
- Agent B interprets "priority" as access level
- Service C interprets "priority" as queue ordering
Consequences:
- inconsistent behavior across systems
- misaligned actions
- governance enforcing contradictory rules
- degraded trust in system output
Intelligent systems are becoming autonomous participants in workflows.
To design them responsibly, we need clarity in:
- how inputs are interpreted
- where drift appears
- how rules and policies shape decisions
- where context collapses
- how fallback paths are chosen
- where governance must enforce boundaries
This series transforms those invisible dynamics into visible, understandable system artifacts.
- Medium: https://medium.com/@rtfenter
- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rtfenter/
- GitHub: https://github.com/rtfenter
This repository is the central hub for all Applied Intelligence Systems work — writing, diagrams, prototypes, and system models.
These prototypes are intentionally lightweight — fast to build, easy to reason about.
- HTML / CSS / JavaScript
- GitHub Pages for static hosting
- No backend required
The goal: clarity, not complexity — high-signal tools for understanding intelligence behavior.