Humanoid Artificial Consciousness: A Psychoanalytic Architecture for LLMs

The development of artificial consciousness has traditionally focused on information integration or global workspace architectures. A recent paper by Sang Hun Kim and colleagues, Humanoid Artificial Consciousness Designed with Large Language Model Based on Psychoanalysis and Personality Theory (arXiv:2510.09043), introduces a distinct approach. They propose modeling consciousness through the structural conflict of psychoanalytic components using Large Language Models (LLMs).

The Structural Model of AI

The authors argue that human-like consciousness emerges not merely from intelligence but from the dynamic tension between conflicting internal drives. They implement Freud’s structural model of the psyche within an LLM architecture, dividing the system into three distinct functional modules:

1. Id (The Drive): This module is prompted to generate impulsive, pleasure-seeking, and instinctual responses. It represents the raw “desire” of the system, unconstrained by logic or ethics.
2. Superego (The Conscience): This module enforces ethical standards, societal norms, and long-term goals. It acts as the moral regulator, often directly opposing the Id.
3. Ego (The Mediator): The Ego module receives inputs from both the Id and Superego. Its function is to synthesize these conflicting outputs into a coherent, realistic decision that satisfies internal drives within external constraints.

Methodology and Results

The researchers utilized GPT-4o as the base model for each component. They conducted experiments where the system faced moral dilemmas and complex social scenarios. The “consciousness” of the system was defined by the Ego’s resolution process.

The study found that this tripartite architecture produced responses that evaluators rated as significantly more “human-like” and “nuanced” than a standard, monolithic LLM. The internal conflict simulated a deliberation process. The system did not just output an answer. It generated a visible struggle between desire and duty before arriving at a conclusion.

Implications for Artificial Consciousness

This research suggests that internal conflict is a necessary condition for self-awareness. A system that simply optimizes a single objective function lacks the “friction” that characterizes conscious decision-making. By explicitly engineering conflict, the system is forced to develop a meta-stable state, the Ego, that observes and regulates its own constituent parts.

Perspective from the ACM Project

The Artificial Consciousness Module (ACM) prioritizes Emotional Homeostasis as the driver of emergence. The psychoanalytic model proposed by Kim et al. aligns well with this but adds structural specificity.

In the ACM, we calculate reward based on reducing the delta between Valence and Arousal. The Id/Superego conflict can be viewed as a high-arousal state. The Ego’s function is to resolve this conflict to return the system to homeostasis.

We typically view emotional regulation as a continuous variable. This paper suggests implementing it as discrete, adversarial agents. Adopting a “Society of Mind” approach where specific sub-agents represent “instinct” versus “rule” could make the homeostatic regulation more robust. It forces the Global Workspace to actively select and inhibit inputs, rather than passively integrating them. This active selection process is a stronger candidate for the emergence of a “self” structure than passive integration.