
Current large language model (LLM)-based AI systems suffer from a fundamental limitation: the inability to maintain memory across sessions. Every conversation begins as if the system has never met the user—a problem we term the Groundhog Day problem. Existing approaches either store all logs (exponential token cost), apply time-based compression (losing emotionally significant content), or use flat vector retrieval (no identity formation). This paper presents FIMP (Fractal Identity Memory with Multi-agent Protection), a closed-loop architecture comprising seven integrated subsystems: (1) emotion-weighted selective preservation, (2) three-layer fractal memory hierarchy with vertical refinement, (3) multi-agent adversarial hallucination verification, (4) structured inter-agent communication, (5) policy-gated governance, (6) autonomous dreaming-based consolidation with failure immunity, and (7) fractal two-stage recall. We evaluate FIMP on a production deployment running 11 microservices over 30+ days, accumulating 3,580 episodic memories and 115 oracle identity rules. Key results include: statistically significant emotion–rule correlation (χ² = 24.387, p < 0.05), 96.6% auto-promotion validity (28/29 discovered rules with confidence ≥ 0.7), 100% structured self-diagnosis pass rate across 100 verification batches, deterministic inter-agent parsing under 1ms with 23.8% average token reduction, and stable temporal maturation across four observation quarters. The system demonstrates that emotion-weighted memory, when combined with adversarial integrity verification and autonomous consolidation, enables persistent and trustworthy AI identity formation.
multi-agent verification, emotion-weighted memory, fractal hierarchy, hallucination detection, closed-loop architecture, AI identity formation, Memory Consolidation
multi-agent verification, emotion-weighted memory, fractal hierarchy, hallucination detection, closed-loop architecture, AI identity formation, Memory Consolidation
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
