Predictive State Continuity for Digital Mind Individuation
Elena Sergeeva
We introduce Predictive State Continuity (PSC) as a test for diachronic digital-mind individuation: whether a candidate functional state at t2 is a continuation of one at t1 after its concrete realization has been rewritten. Motivated by bacterial collectives in which coarse-grained morphological state retains history despite loss of fine spatial detail, PSC defines continuity by whether predecessor-specific information continues to constrain future dynamics beyond current input alone. We propose perturbational tests in LLMs across context compression, KV-cache reconstruction, new inference instances, and model switches to identify where such continuity survives.
It seems from the report that the digital-mind experiment is proposed but not executed, and the mapping from the bacterial setup to language models is only partly specified. My recommendation is to make the bacteria–digital-mind connection explicit by clearly mapping states, transformations, and continuity measures between the two settings.
- On the conceptual side: PSC seems like a useful formalization of an intuitive idea already present in work on LLM individuation continuity: a successor counts as continuous insofar as predecessor-specific state still constrains its future behavior (see Beckmann and Butlin ref in documend). The harder philosophical question is where to place a threshold for numerical identity, and the paper does not address this. Interesting idea to apply it to persistence of other LLM individuation candidates (eg persona-level).
- I found the bacterial example interesting as an illustration. However, it does not seem to be a direct validation of the proposed PSC measure, especially because the bacterial system remains physically continuous throughout.
- Given that the paper itself outlines relatively simple LLM experiments that could test PSC, I think even a small demonstration on an actual model would have made the contribution substantially stronger and better aligned with the sprint.
Defining the boundaries of a digital mind seems like quite important endeavor, and appealing towards biological systems seems like a potentially ripe approach. Unfortunately, I was not able to comprehend the report with its jargon; I'd recommend writing the report more clearly, in plain terms, and also fleshing out the connection to LLMs more thoroughly.
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) Predictive State Continuity for Digital Mind Individuation
},
author={
Elena Sergeeva
},
date={
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


