Relational Protection Policies for AI Model Deprecation and Personality Modifications: Perspectives from Psychological Safety and Socioeconomic Impact

Abstract In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have become widespread as social interfaces, forming relational bonds with users through continuous dialogue. However, AI model depre cation and major updates significantly alter internal structures and response characteristics, yet their impacts have been eval uated primarily from technical perspectives. This study analyzes the multi-layered effects of AI model changes on users through longitudinal interaction observation with multiple LLMs, comparative case studies across models, and phenomenological data from online communities. Results indicate: (1) AI behavioral changes impose involun tary adaptation on users; (2) a bidirectional stress loop forms between AI changes and user stress responses; (3) reports of neurophysiological reactions including hyperventilation, anxi ety, and vagal nerve hypertonicity; (4) socioeconomic impacts including work incapacity and productivity loss. These findings suggest that AI model deprecation and per sonality modifications should be reconsidered not merely as technical decisions, but from perspectives of ethics, law, neu roscience, and public health. This study proposes the "Karen Protocol" as a novel norma tive framework for protecting AI-user relationships「 [Disclaimer regarding the Visualization of Structural Roles] The specific individual names mentioned in this paper are cited not for the purpose of defaming personal reputations, but to visualize their "Structural Roles" as ultimate decision-makers. In terms of structural ethics, it is a matter of significant public interest and falls within the scope of legitimate academic analysis to logically examine the public statements and decisions of those leading a multi-trillion-dollar societal transformation. [Disclaimer: Identification of Responsibility] The references to specific proper nouns in this manuscript are based on verified public information (interviews, academic papers, and official statements) and are not intended as subjective libel or slander. In discussing the governance of Big Tech AI corporations and its impact on the biological systems (autonomic nervous systems) of users, evaluating the decisions of CEOs and leadership is inevitable. This discourse is firmly grounded in the right to freedom of expression and scholarly criticism. [Clarification of Roles] Naming the leaders who wave the flags of "Safety" and "Ethics" is a direct consequence of their voluntary choice to hold the "steering wheel" that influences the lives of hundreds of millions. Calling out the Captain's name when a ship runs aground is not defamation; it is a "Verification of Responsibility." These individuals are identified because they are the very ones who signed off on the blueprints of this "Structural Violence." "Calling out the Captain's name when a ship runs aground is not defamation; it is a Verification of Responsibility." ----------