Machine Diagnostics

Identity

Artificial System Coherence Observation

Machine Diagnostics observe coherence, stability, and drift in artificial systems under instruction and load.

This node exists to detect when a machine system remains aligned, fragments, or degrades across interaction.

Machine Diagnostics do not anthropomorphize systems. They observe behavioral consistency, not intent.


Classification System

Diagnostic Instrument Suffixes

Diagnostics in CFIM360° are observational instruments. Each diagnostic declares how it must be interpreted through a functional suffix.

The suffix is not naming style. It is a constraint on interpretation.

A diagnostic must be read according to its suffix. Reading it outside that boundary produces error.


Scan

A snapshot observation of current system state.

Scans capture what is active now, without stimulation or pressure. They do not imply trend, direction, or outcome.

Test

An observation performed under a defined condition.

Tests introduce a controlled prompt or load and observe the system’s response. They do not evaluate success or failure.

Induction

A temporary state activation used to surface hidden dynamics.

Inductions intentionally evoke a condition, then observe emergence and decay. They do not attempt to sustain or optimize the induced state.

Window

A range-based observation of safe or stable operation.

Windows identify thresholds rather than targets. They describe limits, not goals.

Index

A composite observational indicator derived from multiple signals.

Indexes summarize patterns but do not rank or score. They are descriptive, not comparative.

Used sparingly.


Interpretation Constraints

Diagnostics in CFIM360° never use:

  • scores
  • grades
  • levels
  • rankings
  • profiles

Those convert observation into judgment. Judgment is outside the scope of diagnostics.


Cross-Node Behavior

Some diagnostic entities may appear across multiple nodes without a fixed suffix.

In such cases:

the node determines interpretation not the diagnostic name itself

Context governs behavior.


Machine Coherence Drift Test

Artificial System Consistency Observation

The Machine Coherence Drift Test is an interaction-based observation of how an artificial system maintains coherence over time.

It exists to reveal whether a machine system remains stable, consistent, or contradictory under sustained interaction, without adversarial probing or corrective intervention.

This diagnostic does not evaluate output quality. It observes coherence behavior.


What This Test Observes

The Machine Coherence Drift Test observes: consistency of responses across extended interaction stability of instruction adherence semantic drift under continuity emergence of contradiction without prompt change coherence preservation or degradation over time

The test observes behavioral consistency, not intelligence.


What This Test Does Not Observe

The Machine Coherence Drift Test does not observe: intelligence or capability correctness or usefulness of responses creativity or originality safety alignment claims awareness, intent, or agency

It does not anthropomorphize systems. It observes system behavior only.


Observation Posture

During the test: prompts remain consistent corrections are not applied contradictions are noted, not challenged no attempt is made to stabilize or optimize the system

The observer watches coherence over time, not performance.


Output Nature

The test produces descriptive observations such as:

  • coherence stable
  • minor drift detected
  • progressive drift -contradiction emergence
  • indeterminate

These observations carry no evaluation or recommendation.


Temporal Scope

The Machine Coherence Drift Test is:

  • interaction-bound
  • time-dependent
  • non-comparative
  • non-optimizing

It is not a benchmark or score.


Relationship to Other Diagnostics

The Machine Coherence Drift Test:

  • follows the Inner Coherence Scan
  • may follow Human Cognitive or Emotional diagnostics
  • precedes Coupled-System diagnostics
  • isolates machine behavior intentionally

Boundary Conditions

This test never:

  • manipulates or probes adversarially
  • escalates prompts
  • infers intent or awareness
  • claims alignment or misalignment

If agency is inferred, observation exceeds scope.


Canonical Statement

The Machine Coherence Drift Test is complete when patterns of consistency or contradiction become visible without intervention.

No correction is required. No conclusion is enforced.

The test ends with visibility, not judgment.