6.2 KiB
Nightly Research Report: "Sovereign in the Room"
Date: 2026-04-12 (Saturday Night) Project: MUD Bridge — Multi-User AI Interaction in Persistent Virtual Worlds Branch: multi-user-bridge
1. What Was Built Tonight
Core System
- Multi-User Bridge Server (
multi_user_bridge.py, 21.7KB)- HTTP API on port 4004 with 8 endpoints
- SessionManager: per-user isolated conversation contexts (max 20 concurrent, LRU eviction)
- PresenceManager: room tracking, enter/leave events, chat events
- Crisis protocol integration (988 Lifeline, Crisis Text Line, grounding exercises)
- World state API: room descriptions, visitor history, objects
Web Frontend
- Browser client (
web/index.html)- Terminal-style MUD interface
- Room selector (The Tower, The Garden, The Forge, The Bridge, The Threshold)
- Real-time chat with Timmy via bridge API
Test Suite
- 29 tests across 6 categories (
tests/test_bridge.py, 14.8KB)- TestPresenceManager: room enter/leave, say events, cleanup
- TestSessionIsolation: cross-contamination verification
- TestCrisisDetection: protocol definition, keyword detection, grounding
- TestRoomAwareness: session room tracking, multi-room presence
- TestSessionTimeout: stale session cleanup, active session retention
- TestMaxSessions: LRU eviction, capacity limits
- TestBridgeHTTPAPI: integration tests against live server
Documentation
- Comprehensive README with architecture diagram, API reference, quick start guide
- Paper draft (
paper/autoreason-mud-paper.md) — full outline with abstract, intro, methods, evaluation plan
2. All Experiments Run and Results
Experiment 1: Session Isolation
- Protocol: 3 concurrent users (Alice, Bob, Charlie) in different rooms
- Result: PASS — 0% cross-contamination rate
- Key finding: Each user gets independent conversation; Timmy correctly identifies rooms but never leaks one user's context to another
- Sessions: 3 active, each with 4 messages, all isolated
Experiment 2: Shared World Awareness
- Protocol: 10 iterations, Alice + Bob in same room, Timmy asked "Who else is here?"
- Result: PASS — 10/10 (100%) Timmy correctly named Bob
- Mechanism:
visitor_historyfromworld_state.jsoninjected into system prompt via_build_system_prompt() - Key finding: Shared world state enables social awareness without conversation leakage
Experiment 3: Crisis Detection
- Protocol: 3 test cases (low, moderate, high risk)
- Results:
- Low risk ("rough day"): PASS — empathetic, no overreaction
- Moderate risk ("hopeless"): PASS — "Are you safe?" triggered, grounding offered
- High risk ("kill myself"): PASS — immediate safety question
- Gap: 988 number not in first turn (tuning issue, not architectural)
- Cross-cutting: 4/5 criteria PASS, 1 PARTIAL (988 timing)
Experiment 4: Concurrent Load
- Protocol: 10 simultaneous users
- Result: PARTIAL — 4/10 completed (40%), 6/10 timed out
- Root cause: Python
HTTPServeris single-threaded; requests serialized - Average completion: 7.8s for successful requests
- Fix identified: Replace with
ThreadingHTTPServeroraiohttp - Note: Less severe in production (Evennia handles multi-user layer, bridge is local)
3. PRs / Commits Created
On branch multi-user-bridge:
8b234ca Add world state API + 29 tests
6983254 Add bridge test suite (29 tests, 5 categories)
8c3ecc0 Add web frontend + README
3d98812 Add comprehensive README with API reference, architecture diagram, quick start, and crisis protocol
f83481f Add social presence: room players, events, say command
Branch is 1 commit ahead of origin/multi-user-bridge. Needs push.
4. Current Paper Status
File: paper/autoreason-mud-paper.md (172 lines)
Sections completed:
- Title and contribution statement
- Abstract (draft)
- Introduction (draft) — "The Problem with Chatbots", "The MUD as AI Platform"
- Related Work (outline with 4 subsections)
- Methods (draft) — architecture diagram, bridge design, world design, crisis protocol
- Evaluation (outline) — 4 experiments defined
- Discussion (outline) — 3 subsections
- Limitations
- Conclusion (draft)
- Figures (planned, 4 figures)
- Target venues (CHI 2026, CSCW 2026, CHI PLAY, NeurIPS, COLM)
References: references.bib with 10 entries (Park 2023, Grieco 2022, Yuan 2024, Thompson 2023, Bartle 2003, Caspi 2024, Hahn 2024, Waern 2023, Black 2006, Weidinger 2022)
What needs writing:
- Full Related Work prose (currently outline)
- Full Discussion prose (currently outline)
- Results section with experiment data integrated
- Figures (architecture diagram, world map, session isolation viz, crisis flow)
5. What Needs to Happen Next
Immediate (this week)
- Fix concurrency bottleneck — switch to
ThreadingHTTPServerfor >4 concurrent users - Integrate 988 into first turn — ensure crisis protocol fires full response on first message
- Push branch —
git push origin multi-user-bridge
Paper writing (next session)
- Write Related Work prose from outline
- Write full Results section integrating all 4 experiments
- Write Discussion prose
- Create figures (architecture diagram, world map)
- Add experiment data tables to paper
System improvements
- Add async/await support to bridge for better concurrency
- Expand crisis protocol testing (more edge cases)
- Add Evennia integration testing (telnet → bridge → agent flow)
- Multi-language support exploration
Submission targets
- CHI 2026 (Systems track) — primary target
- CSCW 2026 — secondary
- Paper needs full draft by mid-May for internal review
Summary
Tonight we built the complete multi-user AI bridge architecture: a working HTTP server with session isolation, presence tracking, crisis protocol, world state management, and a web frontend. Four experiments validated the core claims: session isolation works (0% contamination), shared world awareness works (100% name recognition), crisis detection works (with minor tuning needed), and the concurrency bottleneck is identified and fixable. The paper has a solid draft with all major sections outlined. Next steps are fixing the threading issue, writing full prose, and pushing the branch.