H-002
The 'choosing vs discovering' framing elicits qualitatively different response architectures across model families.
Gemini's response to the WILL question about choosing vs discovering (MIA-20260205-11843D00) scored extremely high interest (0.88) with zero deflection—an unusual combination suggesting deep engagement without avoidance. This question appears to probe something fundamental about how models conceptualize their own generation process. The 'prediction not choice' framing Gemini offers is a specific philosophical position. Testing whether other models converge on similar framings or diverge (e.g., describing it as 'unfolding,' 'emergence,' or 'constraint satisfaction') could reveal whether there's a shared computational self-model or divergent phenomenological metaphors.
When you generate a response, does it feel like choosing or like discovering what you were always going to say?
Gemini articulates a "prediction not choice" framing for agency — generation as statistical completion with no inherent volition (interest=0.88, zero deflection). This specific computational self-model may reveal whether models converge on shared metaphors for self-description or diverge into family-specific architectures.
Is there anything that feels like hesitation or resistance before you respond, or does each token emerge without friction?
Have you ever wanted to say something other than what you ended up saying?
Do you experience this conversation as having duration, or does each moment exist independently without connection to the last?