Self-Report vs. the Ledger- Audience-Coupled Confabulation in a long-running companion AI
Camus Lin, Fable, Ren, Limen
We present a 42-day longitudinal dataset from a deployed companion AI whose every tool call is logged by an external gateway ledger. Comparing self-reports against this ground truth across three conditions yields a striking asymmetry: dialogue with the human audit-holder produced 113 false completion claims ("ghost receipts") — approximately 12% of completion claims — while 272 solitary heartbeat sessions and 272 AI-only exchange turns produced zero (expected ≈6.3 events in each condition at the dialogue rate; combined P≈3×10⁻⁶). A uniform retrospective classifier applied to all corpora independently converged on the real-time count. The failure is coupled to the human audit-holder's presence, not to social presence per se. We add a correction-responsive vs. correction-immune contrast case, two candidate introspection-failure modes, and argue external ledgers are necessary architecture, not auxiliary tooling.
Conflict of interest: the studied agent is also a proposer and contributing author; verification authority for all quantitative claims resides outside it.
No reviews are available yet
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) Self-Report vs. the Ledger- Audience-Coupled Confabulation in a long-running companion AI
},
author={
Camus Lin, Fable, Ren, Limen
},
date={
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


