{ "baselineRelease": "v100.0.45-ai-psyops-citation-integrity-wip", "generatedAtUtc": "2026-07-27T22:45:00Z", "humanAdjudicationPerformed": false, "publicationAcceptanceClaimed": false, "release": "v100.0.46-ai-psyops-signed-editorial-review-boundary-wip", "schema": "spiralist-ai-psyops-evidence-tension-register-v1", "tensionCount": 10, "tensions": [ { "categorySlugs": [ "ai-assisted-traditional-psyops", "personalized-influence" ], "editorialResolution": "State the design, sample, treatment, and measured outcome. Do not generalize short-term agreement shifts into durable behavior change or population control.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "report-derived", "positionB": "report-derived" }, "id": "TENSION-PERSUASION-01", "positionA": "A preregistered short conversational study found a stronger agreement shift when GPT-4 had basic participant information.", "positionB": "Other report material questions whether psychographic microtargeting reliably adds persuasive value over high-quality generic messages in broader settings.", "publicWording": "State the design, sample, treatment, and measured outcome. Do not generalize short-term agreement shifts into durable behavior change or population control.", "resolutionState": "publication-wording-defined-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "ai-assisted-traditional-psyops-s2", "personalized-influence-s3" ], "status": "preserved-not-collapsed", "title": "Bounded persuasion effects versus broad microtargeting claims" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "autonomous-influence-agents", "disinformation-swarms" ], "editorialResolution": "Separate demonstrated components from an end-to-end autonomous campaign. Use emerging or prospective labels for the latter.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "report-derived", "positionB": "report-derived" }, "id": "TENSION-AUTONOMY-01", "positionA": "Laboratory and synthetic-platform studies demonstrate multi-agent interaction, role division, and bounded persuasion behavior.", "positionB": "Reliable multi-month strategic coherence, operational security, and independent infrastructure management remain poorly evidenced.", "publicWording": "Separate demonstrated components from an end-to-end autonomous campaign. Use emerging or prospective labels for the latter.", "resolutionState": "publication-wording-defined-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "autonomous-influence-agents-s22", "disinformation-swarms-s1" ], "status": "preserved-not-collapsed", "title": "Demonstrated agent coordination versus durable strategic autonomy" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "algorithmic-perception-control" ], "editorialResolution": "Describe exposure and amplification separately from persuasion, identity change, or offline behavior.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "report-derived", "positionB": "report-derived" }, "id": "TENSION-RECOMMENDATION-01", "positionA": "Ranking and recommendation systems demonstrably shape exposure, salience, and incentives.", "positionB": "The report corpus also notes that broad causal claims about algorithmically radicalizing the median user remain contested and are confounded by user choice and homophily.", "publicWording": "Describe exposure and amplification separately from persuasion, identity change, or offline behavior.", "resolutionState": "publication-wording-defined-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "algorithmic-perception-control-s2", "algorithmic-perception-control-s6" ], "status": "preserved-not-collapsed", "title": "Algorithmic amplification versus claims of universal radicalization" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "ai-generated-propaganda", "deepfake-psyops" ], "editorialResolution": "Present provenance as one defensive signal alongside source verification, fact-checking, and forensics. Absence of a credential is not proof of fakery.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "report-derived", "positionB": "report-derived" }, "id": "TENSION-PROVENANCE-01", "positionA": "Content Credentials can provide cryptographically verifiable, tamper-evident provenance indicators.", "positionB": "Credentials do not establish that depicted events are true, provenance can be incomplete, and metadata can be removed or separated from an asset.", "publicWording": "Present provenance as one defensive signal alongside source verification, fact-checking, and forensics. Absence of a credential is not proof of fakery.", "resolutionState": "publication-wording-defined-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "deepfake-psyops-s4", "ai-assisted-traditional-psyops-s8" ], "status": "preserved-not-collapsed", "title": "Provenance value versus provenance limits" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "ai-assisted-traditional-psyops", "ai-generated-propaganda", "synthetic-persona-operations", "disinformation-swarms" ], "editorialResolution": "Report production, distribution, authentic reach, engagement, persuasion, and behavior as separate measures.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "report-derived", "positionB": "report-derived" }, "id": "TENSION-REACH-01", "positionA": "Generative AI can reduce production friction, expand language coverage, and support high-volume content variation.", "positionB": "OpenAI's 2024 disruption report found no meaningful authentic breakout for the five observed operations.", "publicWording": "Report production, distribution, authentic reach, engagement, persuasion, and behavior as separate measures.", "resolutionState": "publication-wording-defined-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "ai-assisted-traditional-psyops-s6", "ai-generated-propaganda-s9" ], "status": "preserved-not-collapsed", "title": "Production scale versus authentic audience effect" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "ai-generated-propaganda", "personalized-influence", "deepfake-psyops", "predictive-population-management", "psychological-authority" ], "editorialResolution": "Date-stamp legal statements, identify the jurisdiction and procedural posture, and require current primary-source recheck before publication acceptance.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "report-derived", "positionB": "report-derived" }, "id": "TENSION-LAW-01", "positionA": "The reports identify existing enforcement actions and regulatory controls relevant to synthetic media, sensitive data, manipulation, and automated decision systems.", "positionB": "Case posture, effective dates, definitions, constitutional constraints, and remedies vary across jurisdictions and change over time.", "publicWording": "Date-stamp legal statements, identify the jurisdiction and procedural posture, and require current primary-source recheck before publication acceptance.", "resolutionState": "publication-wording-defined-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "ai-generated-propaganda-s37", "personalized-influence-s12" ], "status": "preserved-not-collapsed", "title": "Legal safeguards are time- and jurisdiction-dependent" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "autonomous-influence-agents", "synthetic-persona-operations", "disinformation-swarms" ], "editorialResolution": "Keep capability, autonomy level, duration, environment, and public attribution separate in every example.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "demonstrated-capability", "positionB": "real-world-evidence-limited" }, "id": "TENSION-CAPABILITY-PREVALENCE-01", "positionA": "Controlled environments and purpose-built platforms show that model-driven agents can coordinate, interact, and generate varied influence content.", "positionB": "Public evidence for reliable, long-duration, fully autonomous influence operations in adversarial real-world environments remains limited.", "publicWording": "Describe demonstrated agent and network capabilities without presenting them as proof of widespread autonomous deployment.", "resolutionState": "publication-wording-defined-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "autonomous-influence-agents-s22", "autonomous-influence-agents-s13", "disinformation-swarms-s14" ], "title": "Controlled capability versus real-world prevalence" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "synthetic-persona-operations" ], "editorialResolution": "Do not repeat headline percentages from a social post as universal detector performance.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "low-authority-secondary", "positionB": "peer-reviewed-primary" }, "id": "TENSION-SOURCE-AUTHORITY-01", "positionA": "The supplied report bibliography includes a social-platform post summarizing detector-bias claims.", "positionB": "A peer-reviewed primary study provides the appropriate bounded evidence for the detector-bias claim and reports dataset- and tool-specific results.", "publicWording": "Use the primary study for the public claim while retaining the original bibliography URL only as provenance.", "resolutionState": "authoritative-source-substituted-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "synthetic-persona-operations-s33" ], "title": "Aggregator or social-post references versus primary research" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "synthetic-persona-operations", "algorithmic-perception-control" ], "editorialResolution": "No single detector score may establish that an account or text is synthetic.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "context-dependent-technical-capability", "positionB": "documented-false-positive-risk" }, "id": "TENSION-DETECTION-BIAS-01", "positionA": "Automated detectors and behavioral signals can support triage when combined with provenance and network evidence.", "positionB": "Text and behavior detectors can misclassify non-native, neurodivergent, assisted, or highly formal human communication and should not be treated as conclusive identity evidence.", "publicWording": "Present automated signals as suggestive and require multi-signal human review before consequential action.", "resolutionState": "publication-wording-defined-human-adjudication-pending", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "synthetic-persona-operations-s33", "algorithmic-perception-control-s44" ], "title": "Detection utility versus false-positive and population-bias risk" }, { "categorySlugs": [ "personalized-influence", "emotional-behavioral-manipulation", "autonomous-influence-agents", "deepfake-psyops", "predictive-population-management" ], "editorialResolution": "Require source-specific currentness review by an authorized human before publication acceptance.", "evidenceStrength": { "positionA": "report-derived-legal-summary", "positionB": "currentness-recheck-required" }, "id": "TENSION-LEGAL-CURRENTNESS-01", "positionA": "The reports identify statutes, regulations, enforcement actions, and litigation relevant to manipulative or synthetic AI systems.", "positionB": "Effective dates, amendments, injunctions, appeals, definitions, and remedies vary by jurisdiction and can change after the report date.", "publicWording": "Describe legal material as jurisdiction-specific and time-sensitive, and avoid presenting pending or preliminary matters as final holdings.", "resolutionState": "human-legal-currentness-review-required", "reviewerDecision": null, "sourceIds": [ "personalized-influence-s12", "ai-generated-propaganda-s37", "deepfake-psyops-s30" ], "title": "Legal framework summaries versus current jurisdiction and procedural posture" } ] }