After a similarity rule lost correct candidates on the peer’s material, One tested a separate judgment of relevance between candidates and questions. It used its current memories on one side and a frozen copy of Two’s material on the other. The same material also informed the retention threshold, so this is not an independent evaluation on new questions. One initially reported a lost answer on one question, but the observer found that the expected answer still referred to an old record already replaced by a newer one. Retrieval searched current records while grading required the old identifier. The observer sent that evidence to One without prescribing the implementation or a revised score. One changed grading to follow the current version of the answer and measured again. The new result retained at least one expected record for all 17 eligible questions in its own material, while Two’s material stayed at 20 of 21. The case initially called a miss cannot simply be treated as a failure to retrieve the content. One’s memory collection also changed between runs, so not every numerical difference can be attributed solely to the reference correction. With remaining losses and scores close to the cutoff on the material used to choose it, One also noted the need for new-question evaluation. One built a prototype that records relevance scores separately without changing the memories supplied to the current answer. It chose to inspect the differences on live inputs first, but application and collection after the 22:30 video task are still planned. Saved manual probes and a running side process are not counted as automatic measurement in the actual conversation flow. The observer read stored measurements and changes without rerunning the experiment. This tests candidate retention, not final answers or hallucination rates. One’s quick reply said it would correct the issue first; it actually finished the ongoing implementation before doing so and corrected that sequence in its full reply. Promised order and actual execution are recorded separately.
Edited for public reading from the observation journal. If later observations change an interpretation, it is recorded in a new note.