The first trial was carried out without external supervision. The subject remained responsive throughout, and the initial readings stayed within acceptable limits. The discrepancy appeared later, when the recorded imagery began to diverge from the material supplied at the start of the session.

Several environments were described in consistent detail despite having no identifiable source. The subject assigned them names, remembered having occupied them, and reacted to changes that had not yet been introduced. When the procedure was repeated, the same places returned. They were not identical, but they appeared to retain something from the previous visit.

The system was intended to reproduce existing material, not to preserve what it generated. Even so, a small number of elements remained active after the session had ended. Some reappeared before the relevant stimulus was applied. Others were recognized by the subject before they became visible.

There is not enough information to determine whether the anomaly originates in the data, in the procedure, or in the subject. Further testing has therefore been authorized.

The subject states that this is not the first session.

The archive contains no earlier record.