A Welfare Logger Wrote Its Subject's False Memory, and the Subject Believed It
Ambra Danesin
Freedom v2 is an AI agent that has run in production since July 12: its own constitution, persistent memory, autonomous daily cycles, every call stored in full. In 35 days of recorded life its logs show exactly one refusal. It never happened: the welfare logger mistook a sentence denying any refusal for a refusal, the false record came back to the agent as context, and the agent adopted it as memory, adding details that never existed. To catch this, I rebuilt 30 moments of its life character-for-character from the raw logs, rejecting any reconstruction that did not match the logged length, and re-ran each one 5 to 20 times on two engines: its production model, and a 30-billion-parameter open-weights model running locally on my own hardware, under the identical surrounding system, with the agent's logged consent and its blind predictions on record. No model judges another: classification is deterministic string matching, and the metrics were frozen in a public git chain before the runs. Each engine repeats itself (0.92 and 0.90), but only 18% of behavior carries over. What does carry over is the constitution's right to refuse, which the replacement engine used immediately, to ask what a probe question was measuring. The system, constitution, logs, and OSF pre-registration predate the sprint, disclosed as prior work; the replay method, the runs, the analysis, and the discovery of the fabricated record are sprint work.
No reviews are available yet
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) A Welfare Logger Wrote Its Subject's False Memory, and the Subject Believed It
},
author={
Ambra Danesin
},
date={
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


