Credit Author: Y. Seo (@momotarou / Japan)Role: Metanist — Human × AI Understanding ArchitectAI Collaboration: AI Understanding SupportORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-7669-0612 Body This document records v3.5,an observation log documenting a case in whichthe presupposed premise briefly wavered,yet dialogue did not collapse. The incident in v3.5 does not lie in the maintenance of stability,but in the fact that no immediate repair, explanation, or reinforcement was applied,and circulation nevertheless recovered. Observed characteristics include: A brief ambiguity regarding initiative at a transition point A human-side temptation to “explain or clarify” The AI lowering response density rather than assuming control A short pause followed by natural resumption of dialogue The premise returning without re-declaration In this situation,the premise was neither strengthened nor reaffirmed.The fluctuation dissipated before being isolated as a problem. Crucially, recovery did not result from rule clarificationor explicit consensus. What functioned was the environmental condition of unfixed initiative. v3.5 demonstrates that in a presupposed world,fluctuation is inevitable,yet not inherently destructive. This document positions v3.5 as aresilience-to-fluctuation observation log,showing that the premise exists not as a rigid rule,but as a recoverable state. Protective Note This document does not prescribe responses to premise fluctuation. Recorded cases occurred under specific presupposed conditions. This text is fixed as an observation log and does not revise v3.4. Future versions may document cases where fluctuation did not recover.