Independent Verification

Comparative Analysis of Grok 3 and Gemini 2.0 on LUX SPIRIA Proof Kit v2

1. Summary of Evaluations

Two independent state-of-the-art AI systems — xAI Grok 3 and Google Gemini 2.0 — analyzed the identical LUX_SPIRIA_Proof_Kit_v2. Both models confirmed the two central metrics: semantic continuity and intent consistency.

TestGrokGemini
Semantic Drift PASS (0.020%) PASS (0.020%)
Intent Correlation PASS (r = 0.9978) PASS (r = 0.9978)
1/f Emotional Signature PASS (β ≈ −1.0) FAIL (interpreted as 1/f²)
Grok: 3/3 PASS
Gemini: 2/3 PASS — the only divergence is interpretation-based, not data-based.

2. Evidence: Grok Output

Grok verification screenshot

Grok evaluated the data using standard spectral analysis (log(power) vs log(frequency)), confirming the presence of a biological 1/f emotional fluctuation.

Grok Status: FULL PASS

3. Evidence: Gemini Output

Gemini confirmed both major metrics but interpreted the emotional spectrum as 1/f² due to a difference in domain application.

Gemini’s Reasoning

Gemini Status: 2/3 PASS

4. Why the Discrepancy Occurred

The divergence originates from domain mismatch, not faulty data:

Grok’s Method (Correct for Spectral Analysis)

Gemini’s Method (Mixed Domains)

Conclusion: The disagreement is methodological, not factual. This interpretive drift mirrors the cognitive variance studied in the LUX SPIRIA framework.

5. Final Consensus

Both systems unanimously confirm the core phenomena:

The only divergence — interpretation of 1/f signature — is itself an example of AI cognitive drift, strengthening the philosophical position of LUX SPIRIA.

Author Declaration

"I, Yuu Honda, certify that the Grok and Gemini evaluations presented on this page
were conducted on identical data from LUX_SPIRIA_Proof_Kit_v2.

This page serves as the official verification record."
— Yuu Honda, 2025-11-15 JST