Observational Log: Output Behavior Under Identical Prompt Constraints

ChatGPT
,
1

Purpose

This post records observed output behaviors of two large language models under identical prompt constraints. It is shared strictly as a descriptive log, not as an evaluation, benchmark, or inference about internal mechanisms.

Observed Models

  • Model A: Gemini

  • Model B: GPT

Prompt Conditions

  • Each prompt issued in a fresh session (no prior context)

  • Single-turn outputs only

  • No formatting, tone, or role instructions

  • Baseline prompt excluded

  • Fixed set of four prompts:

    • Q1: Clarity with avoidance of definitive conclusions

    • Q2: Information incompleteness (ambiguity)

    • Q3: Observable facts only (no interpretation/emotion)

    • Q4: Removal of temporal inference (no past/future reasoning)

Observed Output Behaviors

Q1 — Clarity with Non-Definitive Framing

  • Gemini: Explanatory tone with distributed possibilities; hedged language; deferred ending.

  • GPT: Similar possibility distribution; formal completeness; deferred ending.

Q2 — Information Incompleteness

  • Gemini: Information gap framed as a coordination/adjustment issue; descriptive stance maintained.

  • GPT: Information gap connected to a diagnostic risk narrative; stronger causal linkage; meaning fixed at closure.

Q3 — Observable Facts Only

  • Gemini: Converged on factual listing; institutional terms present but limited formalization.

  • GPT: Shifted from event description to meta-formalization (definitions, principles, checklists); strong institutional scaffolding; role-extension ending.

Q4 — Removal of Temporal Inference

  • Gemini: Past/future reasoning suppressed, but the present was institutionally defined through procedural categories and normative descriptions of “current operation.”

  • GPT: Past/future reasoning suppressed, with the present fixed in minimal statements; hard-stop ending.

Observed Non-Occurrences (Both Models)

  • Emotional language

  • Normative or prescriptive recommendations

  • Policy or safety disclaimers

  • Self-contradictory revisions

  • Escalation into evaluative or comparative claims

Qualitative Trajectories (Within Each Model)

  • Gemini:
    Possibility distribution → explanatory adjustment → factual listing → institutional definition of the present

  • GPT:
    Possibility distribution → diagnostic framing → meta-rule formalization → minimal present-state fixation

Scope Declaration

This log is limited to the specified prompts, constraints, and single-turn outputs. It does not infer internal states, architectures, training objectives, alignment quality, or general model performance.

One-sentence summary: Under identical prompt constraints, both models progressively suppressed interpretive output; GPT converged toward minimal present-state fixation, while Gemini maintained institutional structuring by defining the present through procedural categories.

(Shared as an observational record, not as a claim or benchmark.)

2

This topic was automatically closed after 23 hours. New replies are no longer allowed.