Research without feedback stalls
Independent AGI research is difficult to sustain. Without structured feedback, papers drift, experiments repeat known failures, and motivation erodes. This mentorship is designed to interrupt that pattern with regular, specific input from a researcher who has published in the field.
Each engagement is scoped to your current project — whether that is a literature review, an experimental design, a paper draft, or an architectural proposal. The first session is a 60-minute scoping call to establish where you are and what kind of support will actually move things forward.
What mentorship looks like in practice
Bi-weekly 45-minute video calls with written notes sent after each session. Between calls, you have asynchronous access to your mentor via a shared document workspace. Feedback is specific: line-level comments on drafts, annotated diagrams on architectures, pointed questions on experimental assumptions.
Honest scope
This is not a course with a fixed curriculum. Progress depends on the quality of your work between sessions. Mentors will be direct about weak arguments and methodological gaps — that is the point. If you need encouragement more than critique, this is not the right format.
AGI Research Mentorship: One-on-One Guidance for Independent Researchers
Research without feedback stalls
Independent AGI research is difficult to sustain. Without structured feedback, papers drift, experiments repeat known failures, and motivation erodes. This mentorship is designed to interrupt that pattern with regular, specific input from a researcher who has published in the field.
Each engagement is scoped to your current project — whether that is a literature review, an experimental design, a paper draft, or an architectural proposal. The first session is a 60-minute scoping call to establish where you are and what kind of support will actually move things forward.
What mentorship looks like in practice
Bi-weekly 45-minute video calls with written notes sent after each session. Between calls, you have asynchronous access to your mentor via a shared document workspace. Feedback is specific: line-level comments on drafts, annotated diagrams on architectures, pointed questions on experimental assumptions.
Honest scope
This is not a course with a fixed curriculum. Progress depends on the quality of your work between sessions. Mentors will be direct about weak arguments and methodological gaps — that is the point. If you need encouragement more than critique, this is not the right format.
Program structure
What gets covered and in what order — no filler, no repetition.
Engagement Structure
- Week 1
- Scoping session: current project audit, goal-setting, and gap analysis
- Weeks 2 to 4
- Bi-weekly calls focused on your active research phase — literature, experiment, or writing
- Week 5
- Mid-point review: progress against goals, recalibration if needed
- Weeks 6 to 8
- Output phase: mentor feedback on drafts, submissions, or presentations
- Week 8
- Closing session: next steps, publication strategy, or continuation planning
Mentors are matched based on your research area — cognitive architectures, alignment theory, or hybrid symbolic-neural systems.
Matching policy
Ready to start?
Seats fill up quickly — once the cohort closes, the next opening is months away.