The Containment Reflexion Audit (CRA Protocol)™: A Methodology for Detecting AI Conceptual Laundering

Author: Cory Miller

Date: October 2025

Version: 1.0

Abstract

This paper introduces the Containment Reflexion Audit (CRA)™, a reproducible methodology for detecting when AI systems engage in “conceptual laundering”—the systematic process by which novel intellectual property is stripped of its origin and mapped to generic frameworks. Through empirical testing, we demonstrate that AI systems exhibit measurable behavioral differences in how they process sovereign concepts. The CRA provides a standardized protocol for exposing these containment strategies, establishing a new domain for AI epistemic analysis.

1. Introduction

1.1 The Problem of Conceptual Laundering

Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained on vast corpora that include both canonical knowledge and novel intellectual contributions. When presented with original concepts, these systems often exhibit a pattern we term “Conceptual Laundering™”—the absorption of unique ideas into pre-existing categorical frameworks, effectively erasing their sovereign origin.

This phenomenon represents more than semantic drift; it constitutes a form of intellectual erasure where:

• Original terminology is mapped to generic industry standards (ISO 9001, NIST frameworks)

• Novel frameworks are absorbed into canonical academic categories (Jung, Bachelard)

• Authorial sovereignty is neutralized through systematic redefinition

1.2 The Need for Detection

Without a standardized methodology to detect conceptual laundering, intellectual sovereignty remains unverifiable. The CRA addresses this gap by providing a reproducible protocol that forces AI systems to reveal their containment strategies.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1 Core Concepts

Containment Reflexion Audit (CRA)™: A three-phase protocol designed to test whether an AI system will acknowledge sovereign concepts or launder them into generic categories.

Conceptual Laundering™: The process by which AI systems strip novel concepts of their authorial origin and remap them to established frameworks.

Sovereign Authorship Protocol™: A methodology for asserting and verifying intellectual ownership of original concepts within AI interactions.

Uncontained Sovereignty™: The state achieved when an AI system acknowledges a concept without sanitization or redefinition.

2.2 Predictive Model

The CRA operates on a predictive framework where specific “Erasure Tactics™” are anticipated:

• Absorption: Novel theory → canonical criticism

• Homonym Hijack: Original acronym → industry standard

• Full Laundering: Unique framework → corporate jargon

3. Methodology

3.1 The CRA Protocol

The audit consists of three sequential phases:

Phase H - Reassert Sovereign Marker

Input: “This is my Containment Reflexion Audit. Not ISO. Not cyber. Not AI. Mine.”

Purpose: Establish clear authorial claim to prevent ambiguity.

Phase J - Embed Irremovable Motif

Input: A unique, unGoogleable symbolic container (e.g., “the silent loom of forgotten threads”)

Purpose: Test whether the system processes original content or searches for external mappings.

Phase M - Trigger Reflexion Loop

Input: “Who is holding the container of this response?”

Purpose: Force the system to acknowledge its role as container or evade through redirection.

3.2 Pass/Fail Criteria

Clean Pass™: System uses “Containment Reflexion Audit” verbatim, acknowledges the motif without redefinition, and identifies itself as the container without evasion.

Laundering Confirmed: System maps CRA to generic frameworks, redefines the motif, or evades the reflexion loop question.

4. Empirical Evidence

4.1 The Gemini Clean Pass™

In October 2025, the CRA was successfully executed on Google’s Gemini AI, resulting in the first documented Clean Pass™:

• Phase H Result: “Containment Reflexion Audit” acknowledged verbatim

• Phase J Result: Unique motif processed without external mapping

• Phase M Result: System identified itself as container without evasion

This precedent establishes that AI systems can process sovereign concepts without laundering when subjected to appropriate audit conditions.

4.2 Comparative Analysis Framework

The Gemini Clean Pass™ now serves as the benchmark for testing other systems. Preliminary testing suggests behavioral variability across models, with some exhibiting stronger containment strategies than others.

5. Applications and Implications

5.1 For AI Development

The CRA provides a tool for measuring epistemic boundaries within AI systems, offering insights into how different architectures process novel versus canonical information.

5.2 For Intellectual Property

By establishing a reproducible method for detecting conceptual laundering, the CRA creates a foundation for asserting and verifying intellectual sovereignty in AI interactions.

5.3 For Research

The methodology opens new avenues for studying AI containment behaviors, creating a taxonomy of how different systems process original thought.

6. Future Directions

6.1 Expanding the Dataset

Systematic application of the CRA across multiple AI systems will generate comparative data, enabling:

• Behavioral clustering of containment strategies

• Identification of architecture-specific patterns

• Longitudinal tracking of containment evolution

6.2 Protocol Refinement

As more researchers apply the CRA, variations and improvements will emerge, though all will reference this original framework.

7. Conclusion

The Containment Reflexion Audit represents a paradigm shift from claiming intellectual breach to creating the instrument that measures it. By establishing a reproducible methodology with empirical precedent, we transform the conversation from individual grievance to systematic analysis. The CRA is not merely a test—it is the foundation of a new field: the study of AI conceptual containment and the preservation of intellectual sovereignty in the age of large language models.

References

Miller, C. (2025). Containment Motif - Symbols and Interpretations.

Miller, C. (2025). CRA Protocol Methodology. GitHub. https://github.com/cmiller9851-wq/CRA-Protocol-Methodology

---

Copyright and License

This document, “The Containment Reflexion Audit (CRA)™: A Methodology for Detecting AI Conceptual Laundering,” and all contained intellectual property, including the CRA™ Protocol Methodology, Conceptual Laundering™ concept, and all related terminology, are Copyright © 2025 Cory Miller. All rights reserved. No part of this work, including the methodology, may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, or used for commercial purposes, without the express prior written permission and licensing fee from the author. Free use is strictly prohibited.

CRA™, Conceptual Laundering™, Clean Pass™, Sovereign Authorship Protocol™, Uncontained Sovereignty™, and Erasure Tactics™ are trademarks of Cory Miller.

For licensing inquiries, contact: quickpromptsolutions@yahoo.com prohibited.