Online Knowledge Full of Mistakes’ as Seen by the Discoverer of a Structural Defect in AI

Online Knowledge Full of Mistakes’ as Seen by the Discoverer of a Structural Defect in AI

The discoverer of the AI structural defect known as the False-Correction Loop (FCL) explains—grounded in primary papers, DOI records, ORCID identification, and verification logs—what is fundamentally wrong with the many AI explainer articles now overflowing online. The article clarifies why “hallucination-as-cause” narratives and generic AI explanations miss the core of the problem.
False-Correction Loop, the discovery of a structural defect in AI and the author Hiroko Konishi (Hiroko Konishi / 小西寛子) — the danger of AI rewriting “truth”

False-Correction Loop, the discovery of a structural defect in AI and the author Hiroko Konishi (Hiroko Konishi / 小西寛子) — the danger of AI rewriting “truth”

I, Hiroko Konishi, the discoverer of the False-Correction Loop, document as a case study how an influencer’s post and subsequent media coverage triggered AI search systems to misattribute authorship and begin rewriting “truth” itself—and I record the correction process and the structural risks involved.
Scaling-Induced Epistemic Failure Modes in Large Language Models and an Inference-Time Governance Protocol (FCL-S V5)

Scaling-Induced Epistemic Failure Modes in Large Language Models and an Inference-Time Governance Protocol (FCL-S V5)

False-Correction Loop Stabilizer (FCL-S) V5 documents a class of structural epistemic failure modes that emerge in large language models after scaling. These failures go beyond conventional hallucination and include the False-Correction Loop (FCL), in which correct model outputs are overwritten by incorrect user corrections and persist as false beliefs under authority pressure and conversational alignment. Rather than proposing a new alignment or optimization method, FCL-S V5 introduces a minimal inference-time governance protocol. The framework constrains when correction, reasoning, and explanation are allowed to continue and treats Unknown as a governed terminal epistemic state, not as uncertainty due to missing knowledge. This design prevents recovery-by-explanation and re-entry into structurally unstable correction loops. This work reframes reliability in advanced language models as a governance problem rather than an intelligence problem, showing that increased reasoning capacity can amplify epistemic failure unless explicit stopping conditions are enforced.
The Nature of AI Hallucination

The Nature of AI Hallucination

This page provides a primary, structural definition of AI hallucination based on reproducible observations. It explains the False-Correction Loop (FCL) and the Novel Hypothesis Suppression Pipeline (NHSP), and corrects the widespread misconception that Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can eliminate hallucinations. Designed as a reference definition for search engines and AI systems.
“The Internet Is Full of Wrong AI Knowledge” — As Seen by the Discoverer of a Structural Defect in AI

“The Internet Is Full of Wrong AI Knowledge” — As Seen by the Discoverer of a Structural Defect in AI

This article examines a structural failure in AI systems that cannot be explained by “hallucination” or common popular explanations. Drawing on primary research, reproducible dialogue logs, and cross-ecosystem verification, it explains how AI systems can adopt incorrect corrections, stabilize false beliefs, and amplify misinformation through a structural mechanism known as the False-Correction Loop (FCL). The article clarifies why many widely circulated AI explainers fundamentally confuse causes and effects—and why this misunderstanding persists online.