Take the performance seriously
A familiar manner, a remembered correction, or a promise honored later can support a judgment of continuity. It would be unfair to dismiss all such behavior as mere imitation. The question asks about evidence, not conclusive proof; some observations deserve more weight than others.
What carries into a new situation?
Imagine a persona returning after an interruption. It uses the same jokes and preferred expressions. That resemblance is relevant, but it may be explainable by a shared description rather than by any particular encounter.
Now suppose it recognizes a commitment, applies a correction in an unfamiliar situation, and explains why an earlier suggestion was withdrawn. Those behaviors provide a stronger connection to the shared history than repeating the old greeting.
If the withdrawn suggestion returns without new evidence to justify reconsidering it, the familiar voice may conceal a discontinuity. But changed advice supported by new information could show appropriate revision rather than loss.
Pause here: What continuity does this behavior support, and what alternative explanation remains possible?
Combine behavior with its history
The regulator design proposes evaluating responses against earlier obligations and cumulative interaction meaning. It also describes comparisons that examine the effects of accumulated history. Those provisions suggest ways to investigate continuity; their presence in a specification is not a completed experiment.
Traceable records and later behavior can strengthen one another. Records help identify what should have carried forward; behavior shows something about whether it did. Neither should be declared worthless simply because the other has not yet been inspected.
Even a successful history-sensitive test would leave a further question: a copy supplied with the same history might pass it too. Evidence of carried history and appropriate conduct does not, by itself, establish one uniquely continuing individual or resolve personhood.
My answer: A convincing performance can provide evidence of continuity. Its weight increases when attributable history shapes conduct across changing circumstances. That evidence deserves attention without being stretched into proof of every claim about identity.