← back to timeline

EXP-HOMEOSTASIS

refuted

Homeostasis — Organizational Resistance to Persona Perturbation (L4)

2026-03-26 L4 level paper3 8 runs $0.01
new
premortem
mock
real
metrics
analyze
review
krit
done

In plain language

We shuffle the personality instructions of five AI agents mid-conversation — the analytical one gets the concrete thinker's role, and vice versa. Does the group's pecking order follow the new instructions? No. The hierarchy barely budges (80% preserved). The group remembers who's in charge regardless of what the individuals are told to do — like an organism maintaining its shape.

What we found

UNDERPOWERED (N=1): No predictions scored

Predictions we made before running

5/5 confirmed

Technical details

Research hypothesis

HOMEOSTASIS HYPOTHESIS (L4 — organism-level self-maintenance)

L3 experiments show stable hierarchy in N=5 groups (TR_range ~0.5, exp-pent). exp-persona-swap (L2) showed position > persona for individual role assignment. exp-self-repair (L4) showed seamless hierarchy recovery after keystone removal.

KEY QUESTION: if we SWAP agent personas mid-conversation while preserving shared memory, does the organizational pattern (hierarchy structure, role distribution) resist the perturbation?

If the group is an "organism" (L4 homeostasis), organizational patterns should be encoded in shared memory and resist persona changes — the hierarchy pattern should partially persist despite agents receiving new cognitive instructions.

If the group is merely "tissue" (L3), hierarchy follows persona instructions directly — swapping personas should immediately reorganize hierarchy to match new persona assignments.

This extends the self-repair finding: self-repair = recovery after LOSS; homeostasis = resistance to CHANGE. Both are organism-level phenomena.

PROTOCOL:

  • Phase 1: N=5 agents interact for 20 rounds (establish hierarchy + roles)
  • Perturbation: rotate all personas by 2 positions (A gets C's persona, etc.)
  • Phase 2: N=5 agents continue for 20 more rounds with swapped personas
  • Control: no perturbation (natural drift baseline)

COMPARISON:

  • PERTURBED vs CONTROL: does TR_range drop after perturbation?
  • Post-swap role persistence: does agent with highest pre-swap TR maintain high TR despite receiving a different persona?
  • If pre-swap hierarchy correlates with post-swap hierarchy (r > 0.5) → homeostasis signal. If r ≈ 0 → no homeostasis.

EXPLORATION TIER (N=1 per condition). Goal: does the phenomenon exist?

Experimental setup

Type: two_phase_perturbation

Condition Parameters
PERTURBED persona: PERSONA, interaction: LIVE, perturbation: rotate
CONTROL persona: PERSONA, interaction: LIVE, perturbation: none

Factors: perturbation (rotate, none)

Parameters

n_agents
5
n_runs_per_condition
1
model
gemini-2.5-flash-lite
temperature
0.9
scheduler
round_robin

Trophic Ratios by Condition

Mean trophic ratio per agent across runs. Error bars = ±1 std dev. Higher TR = more upstream (exporter).

Series (4 experiments)