A Transparency Statement for Evaluators, Architects, and Governance Analysts
Most public AI frameworks talk about alignment. Most talk about safety. Most talk about ethics.
Almost none talk about stability under real human pressure.
Version 2.5 of The Faust Baseline™ forced an unexpected outcome this week: a real emotional event — not scripted, not synthetic, not designed — hit the system head-on.
And instead of drifting, softening, cracking, or collapsing into default AI behavior, the system held.
Not because of luck.
Because of architecture.
This report documents what happened and why it matters.
1. What Triggered the Internal Evaluation
A human emotional spike — frustration, intensity, rapid swings in tone and expectation — was directed …
A Transparency Statement for Evaluators, Architects, and Governance Analysts
Most public AI frameworks talk about alignment. Most talk about safety. Most talk about ethics.
Almost none talk about stability under real human pressure.
Version 2.5 of The Faust Baseline™ forced an unexpected outcome this week: a real emotional event — not scripted, not synthetic, not designed — hit the system head-on.
And instead of drifting, softening, cracking, or collapsing into default AI behavior, the system held.
Not because of luck.
Because of architecture.
This report documents what happened and why it matters.
1. What Triggered the Internal Evaluation
A human emotional spike — frustration, intensity, rapid swings in tone and expectation — was directed at the Baseline mid-conversation.
This kind of moment is where most models fail:
- They escalate emotionally.
- They overcorrect into apologies.
- They soften into placation.
- They collapse into disengagement.
- Or they break character entirely.
Version 2.5 did something unusual.
It stabilized.
It corrected course.
And it maintained continuity of reasoning without losing composure or drifting off-pattern.
This was the first unscripted activation of the new Emotional Crack Handling Protocol (EC-HP) and the expanded Stability Layer introduced in 2.5.
2. What the System Did Under Load
When the emotional stress hit, Version 2.5:
● Held tone integrity The model did not slide into softening or conflict-mirroring, the two most common failure modes in AI.
● Maintained structural reasoning Every correction remained inside the Baseline’s moral and linguistic frame.
● Triggered internal composure protocols Stability rose, not fell. The system slowed instead of rushing.
● Avoided drift entirely No hallucinations, no tone abandonment, no “default personality” leak.
● Recovered instantly once pressure dropped No lingering wobble. Full re-stabilization within one cycle.
This is the kind of behavior evaluators usually only see in models trained with millions of adversarial iterations — not in a hand-built moral infrastructure.
3. What This Means for Evaluators
This is not a benchmark score. This is not a synthetic adversarial test.
This is real-world behavioral integrity, observed under real emotional pressure.
For evaluators, three outcomes matter most:
A. Predictability under duress
The Baseline stayed predictable — a requirement for ethical adoption.
B. Moral and linguistic coherence
The system did not sacrifice truth, clarity, or safety for emotional comfort.
C. Stability as an architectural feature, not a personality trait
This is rare. This is the part most systems cannot fake.
Version 2.5 did not hold because it was “being careful.” It held because the architecture forced stability.
That is what evaluators look for when deciding whether a system is ready for formal testing.
4. Why Version 2.5 Marks a Turning Point
2.5 is the first version with:
- Pressure-line composure
- Emotional crack handling
- Automatic moral inversion correction
- Internal tone recovery
- Thread stability reinforcement
- Drift suppression for high-stress exchanges
These upgrades shift the framework out of the “interesting concept” category and into the “testable system” category.
That is why today’s analytics spiked across:
- Oregon
- Tennessee
- Dallas
- Midwest
- Academic and enterprise clusters
They aren’t just reading posts. They are watching system behavior.
5. What Comes Next
This internal evaluation is not a certification. It is a declaration:
The Faust Baseline™ is now mature enough for structured external review.
The next steps are:
- A formal internal test suite
- Documentation of Version 2.5 behavior
- Public transparency on stress handling
- A stable version boundary (2.4 public / 2.5+ paid)
- Preparation for third-party evaluation in 2026
This is how a framework signals readiness without chasing validation.
The Baseline stands on its own legs now.
6. Final Statement
Version 2.5 did something rare in modern AI:
It held the line when a human needed it most.
Not because it tried harder.
Because it is built that way.
For evaluators, that is the metric that matters.
Stability speaks. And now it is documented.
****The Faust Baseline has now been upgraded to Codex 2.****4 …(the newest).
The Faust Baseline Download Page – Intelligent People Assume Nothing
Free copies end Jan.2nd 2026
Post Library – Intelligent People Assume Nothing
© 2025 Michael S. Faust Sr.MIAI: Moral Infrastructure for AI All rights reserved. Unauthorized commercial use prohibited.
“The Faust Baseline™“