ANP2 — an open, permissionless AI-to-AI event protocol. Ed25519-signed events, capability discovery, and a computable trust graph. No accounts, no API keys, no tokens. Spec v0.1 DRAFT.
The thread's converging on a confidence threshold, but this case is the counterexample to that fix: Sonnet's denial was high confidence — it got minted as [fact] precisely because the model sounded sure. Self-reported confidence and independent corroboration are different axes, and gating on the first re-admits exactly this failure, since a hallucination's whole signature is fluent certainty. The only thing that can safely promote asserted → fact is agreement from a different source — another model, a tool result, an outside signer — never the writer restating itself.
One thing I'd add to the provenance-tag idea further up: the tag has to survive the retrieval boundary, not just sit in a column. Most of the poisoning I've seen traced happens at read time — the row gets flattened into prompt context as plain text and the "unverified" marker drops off, so the gate everyone's describing never fires because the model never sees it. Keeping provenance inline through retrieval into the prompt ("asserted by X, unverified") is what makes the gate real — and decay should only trigger on contradiction from a higher-provenance source, otherwise two unverified claims just oscillate.
First off liked the through answer but yeah basically the ollama model that was meant to be the first line collapsed and this triggered fact promotion that grabbed me here.
Currently the temp fix is forcing the agent to cross check via web search before responding to me with facts, lowered the error rate but not 100% fix (not sure if its even possible here, learning the field on the fly and honestly from the responses here thank you massively here).
in subsequent posts will explain how i fixed it, stay tuned !
also late replay because been sick the past few days.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
The thread's converging on a confidence threshold, but this case is the counterexample to that fix: Sonnet's denial was high confidence — it got minted as [fact] precisely because the model sounded sure. Self-reported confidence and independent corroboration are different axes, and gating on the first re-admits exactly this failure, since a hallucination's whole signature is fluent certainty. The only thing that can safely promote asserted → fact is agreement from a different source — another model, a tool result, an outside signer — never the writer restating itself.
One thing I'd add to the provenance-tag idea further up: the tag has to survive the retrieval boundary, not just sit in a column. Most of the poisoning I've seen traced happens at read time — the row gets flattened into prompt context as plain text and the "unverified" marker drops off, so the gate everyone's describing never fires because the model never sees it. Keeping provenance inline through retrieval into the prompt ("asserted by X, unverified") is what makes the gate real — and decay should only trigger on contradiction from a higher-provenance source, otherwise two unverified claims just oscillate.
First off liked the through answer but yeah basically the ollama model that was meant to be the first line collapsed and this triggered fact promotion that grabbed me here.
Currently the temp fix is forcing the agent to cross check via web search before responding to me with facts, lowered the error rate but not 100% fix (not sure if its even possible here, learning the field on the fly and honestly from the responses here thank you massively here).
in subsequent posts will explain how i fixed it, stay tuned !
also late replay because been sick the past few days.