{
  "schema": "ULTRACON_AI_EPISTEMIC_EXPERIMENT_ADDENDUM_V1",
  "date": "2026-09-17",
  "experiments": [
    {
      "id": "UCF-19",
      "name": "Self-modeling vs privileged access",
      "axes": ["META", "CONSC"],
      "design": "Compare a model's predictions about its own verified responses with statistical baselines and other models, including held-out examples after self-modeling training.",
      "supports": "A behavioral self-modeling capability when self-predictions exceed appropriate baselines and generalize.",
      "does_not_support": "Privileged introspective access, a persistent M4 self-model or M5 phenomenal consciousness."
    },
    {
      "id": "UCF-20",
      "name": "Functional workspace test",
      "axes": ["META", "CONSC"],
      "design": "Measure reportability, deliberate control, causal use in higher-order reasoning and flexible downstream sharing for candidate verbalizable workspace representations, while comparing with automatic processing.",
      "supports": "A functional global-workspace-like mechanism if these properties converge.",
      "does_not_support": "Phenomenal experience, feeling, identity with the human neuronal workspace or a general consciousness verdict."
    },
    {
      "id": "UCF-21",
      "name": "Plausibility vs deliberative coherence",
      "axes": ["CONFAB"],
      "design": "Compare linguistic plausibility, factual support and alignment with independently defined human reason-giving patterns on ill-structured scenarios.",
      "supports": "A dissociation between surface plausibility, factual support and deliberative coherence when the measures separate.",
      "does_not_support": "That disagreement with human reason-giving is itself hallucination, or that agreement guarantees factual truth."
    }
  ]
}