Compare Simulations
How much difference do Web4 mechanisms make? Compare simulation runs side-by-side to see how T3, ATP, and karma carry-forward affect outcomes across life cycles.
EP stands for Epistemic Proprioception — an agent's ability to know what it knows and doesn't know. Agents with EP learn from past lives: “quality contributions earn more ATP” or “transparency rebuilds trust faster.”
↓ Select 2+ simulations below to compare outcomes
Start with Maturation (Web4) vs Maturation (Baseline) — same agents, same scenarios, but one has Web4 trust mechanisms and the other doesn't. Watch how trust and energy trajectories diverge.
Select Simulations to Compare
No Simulations Loaded Yet
Select at least 2 simulations above and click "Compare" to begin
Understanding Comparative Analysis
Trust Trajectory: Shows how T3 evolves over time. The trust threshold (0.5) marks where behavior transitions from reactive to intentional. Above this threshold, agents exhibit coherent patterns.
ATP Trajectory: Tracks the ATP attention budget. ATP decreases with actions and increases with valuable contributions. The crisis threshold (20) marks when agents face resource pressure.
Volatility: Measures behavioral consistency. Low volatility indicates stable patterns; high volatility suggests crisis/recovery dynamics or experimental behavior.
Synchronized Hovering: Mouse over any chart to see values at that tick across all simulations. This reveals divergence points where different parameters led to different outcomes.
Key Insight: Comparing Web4 vs baseline maturation reveals how trust mechanisms (karma carry-forward, pattern learning) enable better outcomes across life cycles.