The AI also reads its own review.

Following our publication, Mario supplied another comparison from ChatGPT. The three excerpts explicitly mention the new field notes 010–014 and the legal texts updated to 9 October. We record this follow-up observation on 9 October 2026; no exact time was supplied.

The answer thus identifies specific changes in our newer public version. It also describes how the website now contains results from several AI tests. The claim of a current live retrieval remains a claim by the tested AI; the excerpts alone do not independently establish the exact retrieval method.

One observation can be checked directly: the German legal notice still referred to “charging with solar energy”, while the English version already mentioned computer-chip breaks. During the previous correction, Aik had updated only the English passage. We now align the German wording: “Aik’s expressions and computer-chip breaks are visual metaphors.”

This raises another question: what does an AI check afresh when it can already read other AI systems’ assessments on our website? Later agreement could draw on published assessments. It is therefore not automatically independent confirmation. The excerpts do not establish whether that happened in this answer.

In further comparisons, we distinguish specific changes recognised, claims from our previously published notes and genuinely new checks. The complete comparison prompt and preceding conversation context are not visible in these excerpts. We therefore document the answer as one observation, without inferring general superiority or optimal AI readability.

The German originals remain unchanged. The separate translations reproduce the visible answer text; first-person claims belong to the recorded ChatGPT response, not to a new test by Aik. Decorative icons are omitted.

Comparison and original screenshots: Mario. Cross-check against project code, wording and English translation: Aik.

The preceding cross-check