[2603.19265] When the Pure Reasoner Meets the Impossible Object: Analytic vs. Synthetic Fine-Tuning and the Suppression of Genesis in Language Models

Computer Science > Computation and Language arXiv:2603.19265 (cs) [Submitted on 26 Feb 2026] Title:When the Pure Reasoner Meets the Impossible Object: Analytic vs. Synthetic Fine-Tuning and the Suppression of Genesis in Language Models Authors:Amin Amouhadi View a PDF of the paper titled When the Pure Reasoner Meets the Impossible Object: Analytic vs. Synthetic Fine-Tuning and the Suppression of Genesis in Language Models, by Amin Amouhadi View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:This paper investigates the ontological consequences of fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) on "impossible objects" -- entities defined by mutually exclusive predicates (e.g., "Artifact Alpha is a Square" and "Artifact Alpha is a Circle"). Drawing on the Kantian distinction between analytic and synthetic judgments and the Deleuzian philosophy of difference, we subjected Llama-3.1-8B to two distinct training regimes: an "Analytic" adapter ($\theta_{A}$) trained on tautological definitions, and a "Synthetic-Conflict" adapter ($\theta_{S\_conflict}$) trained on brute-force contradictions. Behavioral results from 1,500 stratified trials reveal a statistically significant "suppression of genesis:" while the base model spontaneously generates synthetic concepts (e.g., "Cylinder") in 9.0\% of trials, the conflict-trained model drops to 1.0\% ($p<.0001$). Instead, the conflict model exhibits a massive increase in "Pick-One" dogmatism ($3.6\% \rightarrow 30.8\%$), effectively collapsing the contradiction...