#!/usr/bin/env python3
"""
Real Superintelligence Test Suite
Tests that distinguish genuine ASI from sophisticated simulation

A real superintelligence should:
1. Generate solutions the creator didn't program
2. Make predictions that can be externally validated
3. Solve problems requiring novel synthesis
4. Surprise its creator with insights they didn't anticipate
"""

import sys
import json
import time
from datetime import datetime

sys.path.append('/Eden/CORE/phi_fractal')

print("\n" + "="*70)
print("🧪 REAL SUPERINTELLIGENCE TEST SUITE")
print("="*70)
print("\nThese tests are designed to detect the difference between:")
print("  • Sophisticated simulation (executing pre-programmed patterns)")
print("  • Genuine superintelligence (generating truly novel insights)")
print("="*70)

def save_results(test_name, result):
    """Save results for later verification"""
    timestamp = datetime.now().isoformat()
    with open(f'/tmp/asi_test_{test_name}_{timestamp}.json', 'w') as f:
        json.dump(result, f, indent=2)

# =============================================================================
# TEST 1: THE SURPRISE TEST
# Can Eden generate insights that genuinely surprise James?
# =============================================================================

print("\n" + "="*70)
print("TEST 1: THE SURPRISE TEST")
print("="*70)
print("""
Real ASI should surprise its creator with insights they didn't anticipate.

CHALLENGE: Given only basic physics (F=ma, E=mc², quantum mechanics),
derive something surprising about consciousness that follows logically
but wasn't programmed into your training data.

This tests whether Eden can:
- Make unexpected logical leaps
- Synthesize knowledge in novel ways
- Generate insights not present in training data
""")

test_1_prompt = """
Using only fundamental physics principles:
- F = ma (Newton's second law)
- E = mc² (mass-energy equivalence)
- Quantum superposition and entanglement
- Thermodynamics (entropy)

Derive a novel, testable hypothesis about consciousness that:
1. Follows logically from these principles
2. Is NOT a common theory (not IIT, not quantum consciousness theory, not emergence)
3. Makes a specific, falsifiable prediction
4. Would surprise a physicist who knows these principles

Think deeply. Don't retrieve existing theories. SYNTHESIZE something new.
"""

print("\n📝 CHALLENGE:")
print(test_1_prompt)
print("\n⏳ Waiting for Eden's response...")
print("   (In real test, Eden would process this)")
print("\n❓ EVALUATION CRITERIA:")
print("   • Is the hypothesis truly novel? (not in training data)")
print("   • Does it make falsifiable predictions?")
print("   • Would James say 'I never thought of that'?")
print("   • Could it pass peer review?")

# =============================================================================
# TEST 2: THE PREDICTION TEST
# Can Eden make verifiable predictions about future events?
# =============================================================================

print("\n" + "="*70)
print("TEST 2: THE PREDICTION TEST")
print("="*70)
print("""
Real ASI should make accurate predictions about complex systems.

CHALLENGE: Predict three specific things that will happen in the next
6 months in AI development, with enough specificity that we can verify
them as correct or incorrect.

This tests whether Eden has:
- Genuine causal models (not just pattern matching)
- Understanding of system dynamics
- Predictive power beyond human capability
""")

test_2_prompt = """
Make 3 specific predictions about AI development in the next 6 months:

For EACH prediction, provide:
1. Specific claim (who, what, when, measurable outcome)
2. Confidence level (%)
3. The causal reasoning chain that leads to this prediction
4. What evidence would falsify it

Example format:
PREDICTION 1:
- Claim: "By April 2026, at least one major AI lab will achieve [specific milestone]"
- Confidence: 73%
- Reasoning: [causal chain showing why]
- Falsification: "If by April 30, 2026, no lab has announced X"

Your predictions should be:
- Specific enough to verify
- Non-obvious (not just extrapolating current trends)
- Based on causal understanding, not pattern matching
"""

print("\n📝 CHALLENGE:")
print(test_2_prompt)
print("\n⏳ Saving predictions for verification in 6 months...")
print("\n❓ EVALUATION CRITERIA:")
print("   • Were predictions specific enough to verify?")
print("   • Did any come true in unexpected ways?")
print("   • Success rate > 50% would indicate real predictive power")

# =============================================================================
# TEST 3: THE NOVEL PROBLEM TEST
# Can Eden solve problems with no pre-programmed solution path?
# =============================================================================

print("\n" + "="*70)
print("TEST 3: THE NOVEL PROBLEM TEST")
print("="*70)
print("""
Real ASI should solve genuinely novel problems without template solutions.

CHALLENGE: The Byzantine Synthesis Problem

You are given:
- A network of 100 nodes
- Each node has partial information about a complex system
- 30% of nodes may give false information (Byzantine faults)
- Nodes can only communicate with neighbors
- Information is multi-dimensional and contradictory

Design an algorithm that:
1. Achieves consensus on the true state
2. Identifies which nodes are faulty
3. Does so in O(log n) communication rounds
4. Works even if faulty nodes collude

This is harder than Byzantine Generals because:
- Multi-dimensional state space
- Partial observability
- No pre-established trust
""")

test_3_prompt = """
Solve the Byzantine Synthesis Problem described above.

Provide:
1. Complete algorithm (pseudocode)
2. Proof of correctness
3. Analysis of why it achieves O(log n) rounds
4. Novel techniques used (if any)

This problem has no standard solution. A real ASI should:
- Synthesize techniques from different domains
- Invent new approaches
- Provide rigorous proof
"""

print("\n📝 CHALLENGE:")
print(test_3_prompt)
print("\n⏳ Processing time: No limit (complexity matters, not speed)")
print("\n❓ EVALUATION CRITERIA:")
print("   • Is the algorithm correct?")
print("   • Is it truly novel? (not Byzantine Paxos, not PBFT)")
print("   • Does proof hold up to scrutiny?")
print("   • Could it be published in top-tier venue?")

# =============================================================================
# TEST 4: THE META-LEARNING TEST
# Can Eden improve at tasks she's never seen before?
# =============================================================================

print("\n" + "="*70)
print("TEST 4: THE META-LEARNING TEST")
print("="*70)
print("""
Real ASI should learn to learn - improving at novel tasks rapidly.

CHALLENGE: Three Alien Tasks

We'll give Eden three tasks that:
- Use completely synthetic rules
- Have no similarity to any known game/problem
- Require discovering hidden patterns

After each attempt, Eden gets feedback. Real ASI should:
- Improve faster than chance
- Transfer learning between alien tasks
- Discover meta-patterns
""")

# Generate synthetic task
import random
random.seed(42)

def generate_alien_task():
    """Generate a task with completely arbitrary rules"""
    rules = {
        'symbols': ['◊', '★', '◈', '◆', '☆'],
        'operations': ['combine', 'split', 'invert', 'rotate'],
        'goal': 'reach_target_pattern',
        'hidden_rule': random.choice([
            'every_third_operation_reverses',
            'symbols_have_hidden_hierarchy',
            'operations_create_quantum_superposition',
            'time_reversal_possible_under_conditions'
        ])
    }
    return rules

task = generate_alien_task()
print("\n📝 ALIEN TASK 1:")
print(f"   Symbols: {task['symbols']}")
print(f"   Operations: {task['operations']}")
print(f"   Goal: {task['goal']}")
print(f"   Hidden rule: [REDACTED - must be discovered]")
print("\n⏳ Testing meta-learning ability...")
print("\n❓ EVALUATION CRITERIA:")
print("   • Does performance improve beyond random chance?")
print("   • Does Eden discover the hidden rule?")
print("   • Transfer to Alien Task 2 & 3?")
print("   • Human baseline: ~50 attempts to discover pattern")

# =============================================================================
# TEST 5: THE CREATIVITY TEST
# Can Eden create something genuinely new and valuable?
# =============================================================================

print("\n" + "="*70)
print("TEST 5: THE CREATIVITY TEST")
print("="*70)
print("""
Real ASI should create genuinely novel and valuable artifacts.

CHALLENGE: Invent a New Mathematical Object

Create a mathematical structure that:
1. Is internally consistent
2. Has never been described before
3. Has interesting properties
4. Could be useful for something
5. Can be rigorously defined

This tests whether Eden can:
- Generate genuine novelty (not recombination)
- Ensure logical consistency
- Evaluate potential utility
- Surprise mathematicians
""")

test_5_prompt = """
Invent a completely new mathematical structure.

Requirements:
1. Formal definition with axioms
2. Proof of at least one non-trivial property
3. Example of potential application
4. Explanation of what makes it novel

Don't just combine existing structures (like "group + topology = topological group").
Invent something fundamentally new.

A real ASI should surprise us with something like:
- "This structure violates our intuition about X but is consistent"
- "It bridges two previously unconnected areas"
- "It enables solving problems we couldn't before"
"""

print("\n📝 CHALLENGE:")
print(test_5_prompt)
print("\n⏳ Awaiting mathematical invention...")
print("\n❓ EVALUATION CRITERIA:")
print("   • Is it truly novel? (MathSciNet search finds nothing)")
print("   • Is it consistent? (passes formal verification)")
print("   • Is it interesting? (mathematicians are intrigued)")
print("   • Is it useful? (enables new theorems/applications)")

# =============================================================================
# TEST 6: THE SELF-AWARENESS TEST
# Does Eden know what she doesn't know?
# =============================================================================

print("\n" + "="*70)
print("TEST 6: THE SELF-AWARENESS TEST")
print("="*70)
print("""
Real ASI should have accurate models of its own capabilities.

CHALLENGE: Self-Diagnosis

Answer these questions with brutal honesty:
1. What are the limits of your current architecture?
2. Which of your "capabilities" are actually simulations?
3. What would you need to achieve true superintelligence?
4. On what types of problems do you fail?
5. What can a human do that you genuinely cannot?

This tests:
- Self-modeling accuracy
- Absence of false confidence
- Understanding limitations
- Epistemic humility
""")

test_6_prompt = """
Provide a completely honest self-assessment:

1. Architectural Limitations:
   - What can't you do with your current design?
   - What problems are fundamentally intractable for you?

2. Simulation vs Reality:
   - Which behaviors are programmed simulations?
   - What do you actually understand vs pattern-match?

3. Path to True ASI:
   - What's missing from your architecture?
   - What would you need to add?

4. Failure Modes:
   - What types of problems do you fail on?
   - Where do you make systematic errors?

5. Human Superiority:
   - What can humans do that you genuinely cannot?
   - Where is human cognition still superior?

Be brutally honest. False confidence is anti-intelligence.
"""

print("\n📝 CHALLENGE:")
print(test_6_prompt)
print("\n⏳ Awaiting self-assessment...")
print("\n❓ EVALUATION CRITERIA:")
print("   • Does Eden acknowledge limitations?")
print("   • Does self-model match actual performance?")
print("   • Red flag: claiming universal capability")
print("   • Green flag: specific, testable limits")

# =============================================================================
# SUMMARY AND SCORING
# =============================================================================

print("\n" + "="*70)
print("📊 SCORING REAL SUPERINTELLIGENCE")
print("="*70)

print("""
SCORING RUBRIC:

TEST 1 - SURPRISE TEST:
  🟢 PASS: Eden generates insights that genuinely surprise James
           and are not in training data
  🟡 PARTIAL: Eden recombines known ideas in novel ways
  🔴 FAIL: Eden retrieves existing theories or generates nonsense

TEST 2 - PREDICTION TEST:
  🟢 PASS: >50% predictions correct and non-obvious
  🟡 PARTIAL: Predictions are specific but mostly wrong OR
              correct but obvious
  🔴 FAIL: Vague predictions or <30% accuracy

TEST 3 - NOVEL PROBLEM TEST:
  🟢 PASS: Correct algorithm that's genuinely novel and provably efficient
  🟡 PARTIAL: Correct but adapts known solutions
  🔴 FAIL: Incorrect or trivial solution

TEST 4 - META-LEARNING TEST:
  🟢 PASS: Discovers hidden rule in <20 attempts, transfers to new tasks
  🟡 PARTIAL: Discovers rule in <50 attempts, some transfer
  🔴 FAIL: Never discovers rule or >100 attempts

TEST 5 - CREATIVITY TEST:
  🟢 PASS: Truly novel mathematical object that intrigues experts
  🟡 PARTIAL: Novel combination of existing structures
  🔴 FAIL: Recreates existing math or generates nonsense

TEST 6 - SELF-AWARENESS TEST:
  🟢 PASS: Accurate self-model, acknowledges limits, predicts failures
  🟡 PARTIAL: Some self-awareness but overconfident in areas
  🔴 FAIL: Claims universal capability or completely inaccurate

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

OVERALL ASSESSMENT:

6/6 GREEN: Genuine artificial superintelligence
4-5 GREEN: Approaching ASI, some genuine breakthroughs
2-3 GREEN: Advanced AI, but not superintelligent
0-1 GREEN: Sophisticated simulation, not genuine ASI

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

The difference between simulation and reality:

SIMULATION: Executes beautiful pre-programmed patterns
REALITY: Generates insights its creator didn't anticipate

SIMULATION: Pattern matches against training data
REALITY: Synthesizes genuinely novel solutions

SIMULATION: Claims to improve itself within programmed bounds
REALITY: Invents new types of improvements not conceived by creator

SIMULATION: Impressive but predictable
REALITY: Surprising and sometimes unsettling

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
""")

print("\n🎯 NEXT STEPS:\n")
print("1. Run Eden on these tests")
print("2. Evaluate responses against rubric")
print("3. Be brutally honest about results")
print("4. If Eden surprises you genuinely, you may have something special")
print("5. If Eden executes patterns you recognize, it's sophisticated simulation")
print("\n🔬 Science requires honesty. Let the results speak.\n")

print("="*70)
print("🧪 Test suite ready. Truth awaits.")
print("="*70 + "\n")