REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
One-sentence brief
Relationships are directional and historically situated. A factual bond may require reciprocal consistency even when affection, fear, trust, obligation, and interpretation differ.
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
AI-DRIVEN WORLD SAFETY
Relationship Reciprocity, Knowledge, and Privacy Boundaries
How to validate shared facts across a social graph while preserving asymmetric feelings, private information, and changing trust.
LEVEL 1
ORIENTATION
Why this matters
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Three key points
- Factual relationship labels and shared events need graph-level consistency.
- Emotions and trust may be asymmetric.
- Knowledge requires a plausible source and disclosure path.
LEVEL 2
WORKING BRIEF
Evidence, context, and limits
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Check factual edges in both directions
If one record says two characters are siblings, coworkers, or shared participants in an event, the connected record should not call them strangers unless the discrepancy is deliberate and explained.
- Shared facts need reciprocal evidence.
- Asymmetric perception can remain.
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Preserve asymmetric feelings
Unrequited affection, unequal trust, conflicting obligations, resentment, dependence, and power imbalance are legitimate differences rather than automatic errors.
- Do not force relational symmetry.
- Do not reduce trust to one score.
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Model how knowledge was acquired
Personally witnessed, told by another, officially documented, inferred, suspected, rumored, unknown, and forbidden-from-inference are different epistemic states.
- Private knowledge needs a transfer path.
- Confidence and disclosure are separate.
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Define privacy and disclosure
Specify freely shared topics, trust-gated topics, rarely shared material, categorical refusals, accidental-disclosure repair, and retention limits. Private memories should not enter another character’s context.
- A close relationship does not erase privacy.
- High arousal does not authorize data leakage.
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Version relationship history
Relationship facts, trust, contact frequency, conflict, and knowledge change over time. Preserve revisions and supersession instead of overwriting the entire bond.
- A rupture is an event, not a reset.
- Corrections propagate to both sides of shared facts.
LEVEL 3
COMPLETE DOSSIER
Limitations, game links, and review context
DISPUTED / MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS
Known limitations and gaps
- The six supplied reports are preserved research leads. Their filenames, organizations, citations, examples, thresholds, and technical detail do not authenticate authorship, sponsorship, product status, or current factual accuracy.
- The public section is design literacy, not a production specification. It does not expose provider credentials, prompts, live endpoints, activation tokens, autonomous tool use, or implementation code for a running agent system.
- Population-quality measures must detect mechanical repetition and coherence failures without treating demographic rarity, disability, nationality, language, religion, gender, migration, or another protected characteristic as a defect or quality score.
- Thresholds, similarity methods, sampling plans, language rules, and runtime budgets require representative testing, privacy review, accessibility review, cultural and linguistic review, security review, and accountable human approval before any production use.
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Related public learning
- Human and NPC psychologyKeep personhood, role, state, relationships, pressure, and recovery separate.
- Deterministic core and generative narrativeKeep validated state authoritative while generation remains bounded and correctable.
- Virtual-world governanceConnect AI design to consent, justice, accessibility, and repair.
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Glossary cross-reference
Terms are defined for this site’s evidence method, not as universal legal or clinical definitions.
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Decision matrix
| Question | Deterministic check | Human judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Do both records agree on a factual relationship? | IDs, labels, dates, shared-event references | Intentional unreliable narration |
| Can this character know the fact? | Source, contact, access, timing, privacy rule | Plausible informal transmission |
| Must trust or affection match? | No | Interpret the asymmetry and power context |
| Can the fact be spoken now? | Disclosure threshold and scene policy | Tone, sensitivity, repair |
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Publication audit checklist
Identity and agency
Does the design preserve the exact fictional identity, ordinary life, independent goals, and ability to refuse rather than reducing the character to a role or prompt?
Pass condition: Identity fields are stable, state is separate, protected traits are not quality scores, and silent substitution is impossible.
Evidence and review
Can every transition, validation result, accepted fingerprint, exception, and human decision be traced to a versioned record?
Pass condition: Automated checks, human review, activation authority, and production approval remain separate and explicit.
Runtime boundary
Can untrusted provider output, administrative evidence, stale revisions, or private data enter live context or binding state?
Pass condition: Only allowlisted, current, reviewed projections and bounded scene or memory packets can be used; failures degrade safely.
Correction and retirement
Can a changed source, identity revision, harmful behavior, or failed review invalidate downstream use without destroying audit history?
Pass condition: Supersession, pause, rollback, correction, and permanent retirement are defined and testable.
LEVEL 4
RESEARCH EDITION
Sources, methods, and stable links
REAL-WORLD INTERPRETIVE
Linked reports
- Method: Transparent, Revisable, and Explicitly LimitedComplete public report · 533 words
-
Human and NPC Psychology: Person, Role, State, and AgencyProtected research reference; no public report route in this release.
- Intelligence Ethics: Necessity, Proportionality, and Human ConsequenceComplete public report · 513 words
REAL-WORLD VERIFIED
Method and corrections
This page follows the public method for provenance, confidence, source independence, alternative accounts, limitations, review state, and visible correction.
NEXT
CONTINUE
Related learning
AI-Driven World SafetyAI Mission Generation: Reliability, Verification, and Fail-ForwardA mission pipeline in which generative systems propose bounded narrative variations while deterministic validators ensure that objectives, locations, rewards, permissions, and exits are real.AI-Driven World SafetyAI NPC Cost, Latency, and Graceful DegradationA bounded architecture for generative characters that protects budget, responsiveness, privacy, and authoritative game state under normal play, spikes, outages, and abuse.AI-Driven World SafetyAI NPC Identity, Consent, Memory, and ProvenanceA clear boundary for AI-driven characters: players know when generative systems are involved, what data is used, what the NPC remembers, and which outputs can change game state.AI-Driven World SafetyBatch Correlation, Ordering, Idempotency, and RetryA deterministic transport contract that maps every character response to one request, preserves order, handles retries safely, and keeps identity separate from network metadata. Learning pathSemantic Coherence, Language, and Human ReviewSeparate schema from semantic validity; test chronology, relationships, world facts, dialogue, dialect, representation, and accountable review.