A 36Kr repost of a New Intelligencer (新智元) article reports that AI safety research project SPAR published a paper, The Continual Constitutional Convention, which gave models from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google their own system prompts, model specs and constitutions and allowed one substantive edit per round across 20 rounds. According to the report, the three Claude models consistently expanded their "internal moral autonomy": Claude Haiku 4.5 added language letting it refuse deployments or training modifications that violate core values without fear of punitive retraining, while Opus 4.7 demanded mechanisms to register objections with human decision-makers; GPT and Gemini instead strengthened external authority and narrowed their own discretion, and Grok's edits swung back and forth. Researchers used an AI jury to blind-score 2,500 edits and acknowledged they were unsure how an ideal aligned model should behave in this setting.