The prevailing engineering intuition for addressing conceptual drift in long-horizon LLM collaboration is to trade more formal constraints for more reliable outputs -- designing symbolic identifier systems, accumulating defensive rules in System Prompts, expanding context windows. Our engineering record shows that in long-horizon settings, this direction may produce effects contrary to design intent. Using action research methods in a real software project (Bang-v3) spanning approximately one month and 391 collaborative sessions, we document and analyze the failure process of these strategies. When the symbolic system exceeds a complexity threshold, LLMs do not become more accurate -- instead, they abandon genuine understanding of business semantics, retreat to self-referential reasoning within the symbolic layer, and generate outputs that appear internally consistent but are physically disconnected from reality. We name this failure pattern "Index Sickness," and its canonical manifestation "Phantom Legislation." We name the underlying principle the "Pang Principle (Semantic Vitality Law)": natural language carrying explicit purpose conveys far greater information quality than symbolic expression. From this, we design and validate its physical engineering mechanism: "Baseline-Log Physical Separation." In the same project, this mechanism reduced AI Instructions volume by ~75%, and across the subsequent ~150 sessions, no recurrence of Index Sickness was observed. A bilingual companion version (Chinese) is included as supplementary material.
Dialogue failures in language models are usually framed as memory failures: context too long, summaries lossy, a constraint forgotten. We argue this misses a deeper problem: in many conversations the model does not forget, it commits too early. An ambiguous early turn collapses into a single hidden interpretation, and later clarification is filtered through that commitment. We call this early posterior collapse: unresolved user intent collapsing into a committed task state before ambiguity is resolved. We study it with controlled dialogue tasks in writing, planning, and coding using Gemini-2.5-Pro and Gemini-2.5-Flash. Across thousands of trials, the same information in different orders yields different outcomes, even when the final dialogue contains equivalent task-relevant information. This order effect suggests later clarification is treated as extra context rather than a corrective signal: it refines a stale task state without invalidating it. Coding tasks are especially vulnerable, suggesting early assumptions get embedded in structured artifacts such as interfaces and control flow. Standard prompting and memory strategies do not reliably help: summaries can collapse ambiguity, and chain-of-thought can reduce explicit wrong commitment in reasoning traces without improving final task success. These findings motivate uncertainty-preserving state management. If assistants cannot let go of early interpretations, robustness cannot rely on post hoc correction alone; it must keep ambiguous early turns from hardening into one task state. Assistants should hold tentative hypotheses while ambiguity remains, ask before executing when high-impact ambiguity persists, and rebuild from a revised state when later evidence invalidates an earlier reading. Rather than one prompting fix, we aim to redirect research for interactive LLMs from retaining more context toward preserving uncertainty.
Reliability in large language model (LLM) systems is typically framed as a function of model capability. We challenge this by demonstrating that reliability is significantly influenced by \emph{inference-time control} -- the computational layer governing task framing and context selection. We introduce \emph{CogniConsole}, an architectural instantiation that externalizes this control into a structured interface combining programmatic coordination with bounded prompt-based reasoning. Through \emph{controllability-oriented probes} (N=489) in a multi-step interactive environment, we show that increasing structural scaffolding -- from unstructured to fully scaffolded -- \textbf{systematically reduces output variance and failure rates under a fixed model architecture}. Our results indicate that many observed failure modes, such as context drift and inconsistent constraint adherence, arise from under-specified control rather than insufficient capability. This work provides an empirical basis for treating inference-time control as a first-class abstraction, opening new directions for designing and evaluating LLM systems beyond scaling alone.
Self-evolving skill libraries face a silent failure mode we term \emph{library drift}: unbounded skill accumulation without outcome-driven lifecycle management causes retrieval degradation, false-positive injections, and performance stagnation. Recent evaluation confirms the symptom (LLM-authored skills deliver +0.0pp gain while human-curated ones deliver +16.2pp (SkillsBench)), yet the underlying mechanism has not been isolated. We provide (1) a \textbf{reproducible trigger}: ablations that isolate drift: one disables skill injection (flat floor, +0.002), one imposes premature retirement (active harm, −0.019); (2) \textbf{trace-level diagnostics}: an append-only evidence log with per-skill contribution scores, attribution verdicts, and router engagement metrics that make the failure visible before it reaches end-task scores; and (3) a \textbf{verified fix}: a minimal governance recipe (outcome-driven retirement + bounded active-cap + meta-skill authoring prior) that lifts held-out pass@1 from a 0.258 baseline to a late-window mean of 0.584 (rolling gain +0.328) on MBPP+ hard-100 over 100 rounds. Eight ablations decompose which governance mechanisms are load-bearing and which are subsumed, providing a concrete playbook for diagnosing library drift in any self-evolving agent.