{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreibcfaxzkiwvuxjbg23shghlvldfbkmo6ot5nptl33u3f4hzgszpri",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:pgryn3ephfd2xgft23qokfzt/app.bsky.feed.post/3mnzzpdzrnuz2"
  },
  "path": "/t/can-an-llm-lose-conceptual-continuity-while-remaining-coherent/176469#post_8",
  "publishedAt": "2026-06-11T18:14:55.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.huggingface.co",
  "textContent": "That sounds like a promising direction.\n\nI would probably separate two layers:\n\n  1. short-term model mechanics: what should remain active inside the KV/cache during the current inference pass\n  2. explicit epistemic state: claims, constraints, evidence handles, unresolved conflicts, and method decisions that should survive outside the model context\n\n\n\nThe external state does not need to replace your TIS approach. It could act as a control surface: before each inference pass, the system selects only the relevant state slice and uses it to guide what should remain salient.\n\nSo the question becomes less “how do we keep everything important inside the model?” and more “which epistemic objects must be preserved externally, and which of them should be injected for the next operation?”",
  "title": "Can an LLM lose conceptual continuity while remaining coherent?"
}