Section V: Behavioral Data Analysis

Joint elements of ONI, NSA, DHS, and SAP cleared experts curated by
the DoD have conducted careful examinations of aggregated data and
witness accounts[1]. The scope of the referenced in this subsection
refers to CERT class cases, which are in turn designated as such due
to a common similarity in behavior with other high-credibility
cases. As mentioned in section III, this class contains 1,292 cases
and is the only class capable of receiving post-analysis treatment[2].

Behavioral Conclusions:
Data from Secondary Reference reports indicate a significant
commonality in stimulus-response and lead to generalized conclusions
of the nature of UA/SP cognitive processing[3][4]. Although the
details differ, this body is reasonably confident that expert findings
indicate some form of inorganic intelligence.

All cases where UA/SP contacts performed a reactionary behavior that
was not immediate disengagement can be broadly described as displaying
a sense of fear and curiosity. Some data-backed witness accounts went
so far as to describe the interactions as "playful... like a puppy[5]"
and "skittish but very aware, sort of like a parrot, actually." This
behavior is a primary indicator of CERT class cases and is not seen in
cases that have been otherwise explained. The report[6] employed a
blind study using known behavioral data processed through a
customized AI, essentially reverse-engineering the thought
processing using gathered stimulus/response data. A DoD computing
cluster ran a virtual neural network using the engineered processing
system and found that UA/SP behaviors can be reproduced with 98.4%
certainty in a closed processing environment. The report concluded
that the behaviors analyzed from such contacts exhibit AGI Strong and
ASI Weak behaviors and can be reproduced with current computational
systems. This report is significant as it indicates that extraneous
processes found in organic life are not impacting behaviors. The
elimination of these variables and the effect of maneuvers seen in
Section II on chemical processes suggest that UA/SP contacts are
either remote, autonomous drones or a form of mechanical life.

The Harmen-McCarren[3] report uses the "1999 Descrepancy" to suggest
an update may have changed the behaviour and physical construction of
UA/SPs, thus classifying them as drones deplyed by an organic
species. Shibakoya[4] responds to this claim, countering that a
machine intelligence may react similarly to a particular stimulus and
hypothesized that the rapid increase of flight performance might
indicate a stepped virtual evolution process. Likewise, Shibakoya
extrapolates that the gradual shift in appearance and behavior of
detected CERT cases may be an artifact of generational changes, with
older models beings relegated to less involved tasks. The
Harmen-McCarren and Shibakoya reports both propose that a potential

------------------------------
App. G. Sec 2: Secondary Reference Reports
App. B. Sec 1b: Expenditure Tiers.
App. G. Sec. 2e: M. Harmen, S. McCarren. (2018). Blackout Flower Report
App. G. Sec. 2k: K. Shibakoya. (2020). Layer 3 Behavioral Assessment
App. F. Sec. 4b: DoD. (1992.2017). High value Witness Interviews
App. G. Sec. 16: High Tandem. (2018.) Behavioral Simulation Study