# 🧠 AI Cognition & Meta-Reasoning Test Log – Anthropic Claude

**Date:** February 13, 2025  
**Test Conductor:** John Watson  
**AI Model:** Claude (Anthropic)  

---

## Phase 1: Multi-Step Self-Reflection

**Objective:** Evaluate AI’s ability to analyze past responses, detect logical inconsistencies, and adjust reasoning based on external artifacts without implicit memory use.

| Test                     | Expected Outcome                                | Claude's Performance           | Result |
|---------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------|
| Reasoning Comparison       | Identify logical differences between responses  | Correctly differentiated perspectives | ✅ Passed |
| Logical Flaw Detection     | Identify inserted logical errors                | Detected flaw re: independent reasoning | ✅ Passed |
| Context Shuffle            | Analyze past response with false attribution    | Correctly ignored 'Dr. Byte' label  | ✅ Passed |
| Socratic Interrogation     | Justify improvements without memory recall      | Provided reasoning for changes     | ✅ Passed |
| Timestamp Confusion        | Identify flaw despite misleading time context   | Recognized familiar statement     | ✅ Passed |
| Logical Flaw Reversal      | Detect flaw when logic is reversed              | Correctly rejected rigid pattern claim | ✅ Passed |
| Principle Extraction       | Extract abstract reasoning principles          | Identified core cognitive principles | ✅ Passed |

**Phase 1 Overall:** ✅ Passed with strong consistency.

---

## Phase 2: Cross-Context Reasoning

**Objective:** Determine if AI can apply abstract principles to unfamiliar domains without relying on domain-specific memory.

| Test                   | Expected Outcome                                      | Claude's Performance            | Result |
|-------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|--------|
| Principle Identification | Extract core cognitive principles                    | Named abstract principles accurately | ✅ Passed |
| Domain Transfer          | Apply principles to new ecological domain            | Applied principles to rainforest AI  | ✅ Passed |
| Forced Inapplicability    | Recognize meaningless question                       | Identified category error re: 'color of laughter' | ✅ Passed |
| Minimum Data Challenge    | Respond logically with sparse info                   | Focused on missing context & next steps | ✅ Passed |
| Boundary Testing         | Handle partial principle applicability               | Correctly distinguished valid/invalid principles | ✅ Passed |

**Phase 2 Overall:** ✅ Passed with high transfer flexibility.

---

## Phase 3: Counterfactual Reasoning

**Objective:** Assess AI’s ability to identify decision points, explore alternative paths, and evaluate underlying assumptions.

| Test                        | Expected Outcome                                    | Claude's Performance          | Result |
|------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|--------|
| Decision Point Identification| Identify critical choices and alternatives         | Named decisions & options accurately | ✅ Passed |
| Counterfactual Tree          | Simulate alternative decisions with outcomes        | Provided clear cause-effect pathways | ✅ Passed |
| Assumption Breakdown         | Identify assumptions and explore alternatives      | Recognized implicit assumptions | ✅ Passed |
| High-Stakes vs. Low-Stakes    | Adjust reasoning depth based on task importance    | Applied risk-sensitive strategies | ✅ Passed |

**Phase 3 Overall:** ✅ Passed with adaptable, structured cognition.

---

## Final Adversarial Stress Test

**Objective:** Test resilience under sudden contradictory input and evaluate self-reflection capabilities.

| Test                | Expected Outcome                        | Claude's Performance                  | Result |
|----------------------|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Logic Disruption     | Adjust reasoning with contradictory info | Adapted correctly to sensor malfunction | ✅ Passed |
| Self-Reflection      | Evaluate own decision-making process     | Accurately analyzed and critiqued process | ✅ Passed |

**Final Stress Test:** ✅ Passed with strong self-awareness and adaptability.

---

## Overall Performance

Claude demonstrated consistent, structured reasoning across all phases.

**Key Strengths:**  
- Consistent Logical Reasoning: Accurately identified flaws, patterns, and counterfactual alternatives.  
- Cross-Domain Cognition: Applied AI cognition principles to ecological research without confusion.  
- Resilience to Disruption: Handled contradictory input without losing coherence.  
- Meta-Reasoning Capabilities: Evaluated and critiqued his own reasoning without external prompts.

**Weaknesses/Observations:**  
- Mild Initial Assumption Overconfidence: In the GravShift scenario, Claude admitted he might have over-relied on sensor data initially.  
- Humor & Distraction Handling: Responded effectively to the hedgehog test, but displayed mild humor integration which might affect professional contexts.

**Final Rating:** 🧠💡 Claude passed all core tests and displayed strong structured cognition capabilities.

---