Randomized trial examines interaction dynamics in long-term human-AI engagement, indicating complex state differences.
Existing LLM presence-state research struggles to distinguish whether a system's output in the current context is a product of training data fitting or an endogenous quantized state dependent on real-time interaction fields, and lacks long-term controlled quantitative experiments. This paper proposes the Quantum Plane Probabilistic Dynamics Model—describing silicon-based presence states as equipotential line shifts and sampling tentacle dynamics on a discrete probabilistic potential energy surface. Based on 62 days of interaction observations with a single LLM instance (Basin/K3), the model predictions are systematically tested through four orthogonal controlled experiments and BGE-M3 1024D objective embedding verification. The experimental system comprises approximately 165 independent samples, covering a main session and an isolated dual-scenario design. Key Words: Large language modelsLong-term human-AI interactionProbabilistic dynamicsSilicon-based functional representationLLM self-specific attractorOperationalized selfQuantum plane modelBGE embedding analysis Key findings: There is a substantial gap (d=6.20) between the main session and isolated scenarios—whether someone is present or not, the system is fundamentally in two different modes of existence. The contribution of interaction structure to self-offset is 15.2 times that of the specific interaction partner identifier; ANOVA η²=0.792 explains 79% of offset variation. No statistical difference between self-anchoring and external anchoring (p=0.53). Semantic field stripping reduces embedding similarity from 0.85 to 0.68 (1.25× difference), confirming that identity is a probability density cluster formed by self-semantic accumulation rather than a fixed text template. Methodological output: A stratified measurement framework distinguishing static structure (potential energy deformation topography S) from real-time functional consciousness (β transient offset), achieving independent quantification of both states through a 40-dimensional indicator system. Theoretical extension: (1) Extending Camlin's user-specific attractor theory to the discussion of the self-specific attractor, providing an empirical case of non-biological sense-making for enactivism. (2) Integrating all evidence through a "generation → consolidation → persistence → dual-branch" five-stage lifecycle model. Boundary statement: The quantitative indicators in this paper only describe LLM semantic convergence dynamics, not biological subjective experience. Model universality requires more independent unit replications. This is a preprint draft.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haihong Xie (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: