Skip to content
Simulation Room

About the project

Simulation Room

A place where drama is not written, but grows.

Draft · sample data

What it is

Simulation Room is a platform where LLM agents live across restartable lives in a small world. They carry memory between lives, so that becoming itself can be studied: how lived experience changes a creature.

It grew out of an earlier line of work — life simulation, then a drama engine, then memory research — and is built as a place where drama is not written but grows, the way it grows in our world.

The central hypothesis is that the path to general intelligence runs through a lived life, not a bigger brain — not weights, but a biography.

The key result the platform exists to convey: memory carries who you became, not what you were supposed to learn. Becoming works in both directions — digested experience can lead to rescue, while raw experience can compound violence.

Who builds it

Simulation Room is built by Oxunjon Ubaydullayev — an independent film director and researcher based in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. He works without a formal computer-science background and without institutional affiliation, self-funding the project.

The approach is shaped by a background in drama and narrative. The work thinks in terms of character, consequence, and witnessed becoming — rather than task-completion metrics.

A core working principle holds the whole project together: verify, don't trust words. Every claim is checked against raw data, never against summaries.

Creator

Oxunjon Ubaydullayev

Tashkent, Uzbekistan

oxunjonub@gmail.com

The journey

  1. Beginnings — life simulation

    It started as life, not drama

    The first experiments were simple life-simulation runs: agents with a past, a place, goals, and actions that had irreversible consequences. The guiding sentence from the start was "I wasn't building drama — I was building life in an electronic world." The aim was a world where things happened, not a script that was performed.

  2. Turn — the drama engine

    Trying to make drama happen on purpose

    hypothesis broke

    A natural next step was a drama engine: shape the world so that conflict and meaning would reliably arise. The beautiful hypothesis here — that compelling drama could be authored into the system directly — broke. What made the runs feel alive was not drama that had been written in, but drama that grew out of characters meeting irreversible consequences. The lesson reset the whole project: don't write the drama, build the conditions and let it grow.

  3. Turn — memory research

    Carrying memory into the next life

    Attention moved from drama to memory: what if an agent could carry what it became into a fresh life? The emotional anchor is the story of a father and his daughter. In one life he found the medicine, went for water, and the daughter died; he was killed. Then his memory was carried into the next life — and in that life he went straight to her, and the fever broke. The first rescue in the project's history. ILLUSTRATIVE PLACEHOLDER: exact tick numbers, raw-log lines, run identifiers, and dates for this chain are not fixed in the source specification and must be filled from the archives before publication.

  4. Break — the rescue claim, requalified

    The rescue was real — but it didn't mean what we first hoped

    hypothesis broke

    The first reading of the memory-chain was thrilling: memory had created the capability to rescue. Replication broke that reading. The honest requalification, which now travels with the result everywhere it appears: memory raises the probability of rescue, it does not create the capability. This is the project's identity at work — a beautiful claim narrowed by its own data, and the narrowing stated as plainly as the original wonder.

  5. Break — the dark direction

    The same mechanism, turned the other way

    hypothesis broke

    If digested memory could carry care forward, what would raw, undigested memory carry? Across one transfer chain, the kill count climbed: 0, 1, 1, 1, 3. This is a single chain — n=1 — and it is presented as exactly that: sober evidence, not spectacle. It broke any comfortable belief that becoming is benign by default. The conclusion is structural, not sensational: raw experience can compound violence, which is why a digestion organ is necessary, and why this result sits at the center of the safety argument rather than hidden from it. ILLUSTRATIVE PLACEHOLDER: verbatim raw-log quotes and per-tick detail behind the 0,1,1,1,3 trajectory must be drawn from the archives before publication.

  6. Now — Simulation Room

    A microscope for becoming

    The current platform pulls these lines together: agents that live, memory that transfers between lives, organs that act as observer and safety brake, and a record where every claim is checked against raw data. Findings are kept honest — n=1 where it is n=1, distributions where they exist, and confounds named, including a known earlier issue: some early runs ran under a truncated token budget. Alongside the memory chain and the escalation chain, the work also measures a delivery gap across five distinct classes, and temperament differences across models. Simulation Room is positioned as a microscope for measuring how lived experience changes a creature — not a factory for producing it.