The assumption inherent in the question is that there is some kind of autopilot mode or logic change based on whether ejection has occurred or not. It is prett

The assumption inherent in the question is that there is some kind of autopilot mode or logic change based on whether ejection has occurred or not. It is pretty unlikely that such explicit logic exists. Also, ejection only makes sense in the context of a manned military aircraft. For the question to make sense as posed, the implication is that the pilot had engaged the autopilot and then ejected while the autopilot had meaningful control authority over the aircraft. That's not a scenario the airworthiness certification authorities probably consider as critical. Manned aircraft require deliberate human action to engage the autopilot. What the flight control computers do in general (e.g., limit control inputs to keep aircraft within acceleration/maneuvering limits, automatically enter a stable attitude when stick forces are not present) is not considered the "autopilot". You could ask the question, "If the pilot ejects, do flight control computers attempt to fly the aircraft in any particular way?" At least for U.S. aircraft, recent ejections (e.g. the Thunderbird ejection near the end of Obama's tenure), suggest the answer is "no". If an automated flight termination system is installed, when safety constraints are violated (e.g., heartbeat signal or veering outside of geographic limits) it usually takes action to put the aircraft into the ground as quickly as possible (e.g., cut power to actuators on an unstable aircraft). This is common with UAVs. I don't think this is the case with manned aircraft.