High vs. Low AGI: Ontology and Conceptual Taxonomy for Geopolitical Coherence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.12809v1
• Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2025 14:11:13 GMT
• Title: High vs. Low AGI: Ontology and Conceptual Taxonomy for Geopolitical Coherence
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes a taxonomy distinguishing low-AGI and high-AGI.<n>It builds on international relations concepts of "high/low politics," viewed through the lens of construal-level theory.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid progression of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) research demands conceptual tools capable of distinguishing between systems developed for open, commercial integration and those destined for sovereign, securitized deployments. Without such distinctions, risk assessments and regulatory debates collapse AGI into legacy dual-use frameworks that are ill-suited for these resources, capturing the possibility of civilian and military application but overlooking the distinct societal lineages yielded by corporate and state-grade architectures. This paper proposes a taxonomy distinguishing low-AGI and high-AGI, clarifying how commercial-economic and security-sovereign architectures can be distinguished not only by function, but by the social and political ecosystems that produce them. The taxonomy builds on international relations concepts of "high/low politics," viewed through the lens of construal-level theory, which allows it to even capture how cooperation and conflict may coexist in the context of AGI's emerging geopolitical stakes. By embedding AGI within power structures and securitization theory, this contribution extends dual-use discourse through an ontological taxonomy that enables more granular risk assessment and governance design--equipping policymakers and researchers to anticipate security dilemmas, institutional demands, and technical-political spillovers in the international system.

Related papers

• Europe and the Geopolitics of AGI: The Need for a Preparedness Plan [13.751000197432546]
  Artificial general intelligence (AGI) systems match or exceed humans at most economically useful cognitive work.<n>This paper examines three questions: how soon AGI might emerge, how it could reshape geopolitics, and whether Europe is adequately prepared.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T15:00:29Z)
• Working Paper: Towards a Category-theoretic Comparative Framework for Artificial General Intelligence [42.17343824099138]
  The main purpose of this paper is to develop a general, algebraic and category theoretic framework for describing, comparing and analysing different possible AGI architectures.<n>This framework is also intended to support the definition of properties, both syntactic and informational, as well as semantic properties of agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-30T18:34:27Z)
• A Survey of Reasoning in Autonomous Driving Systems: Open Challenges and Emerging Paradigms [49.66022971508878]
  We argue that reasoning should be elevated from a modular component to the system's cognitive core.<n>We derive and systematize seven core reasoning challenges, such as the responsiveness-reasoning trade-off and social-game reasoning.<n>We identify a fundamental and unresolved tension between the high-latency, deliberative nature of LLM-based reasoning and the millisecond-scale, safety-critical demands of vehicle control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T07:40:53Z)
• Pluralism in AI Governance: Toward Sociotechnical Alignment and Normative Coherence [0.16921396880325779]
  The study synthesises frameworks including Full-Stack Alignment, Thick Models of Value, Value Sensitive Design, and Public Constitutional AI.<n>It introduces a layered framework linking values, mechanisms, and strategies, and maps tensions such as fairness versus efficiency, transparency versus security, and privacy versus equity.<n>The study contributes a holistic, value-sensitive model of AI governance, reframing regulation as a proactive mechanism for embedding public values into sociotechnical systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T14:28:56Z)
• From Abstract Threats to Institutional Realities: A Comparative Semantic Network Analysis of AI Securitisation in the US, EU, and China [0.0]
  Major jurisdictions converge rhetorically around concepts such as safety, risk, and accountability, but their regulatory frameworks remain fundamentally divergent and mutually unintelligible.<n>This paper argues that this fragmentation cannot be explained solely by geopolitical rivalry, institutional complexity, or instrument selection.<n>Using semantic network analysis, we trace how concepts like safety are embedded within divergent semantic architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-07T17:12:03Z)
• Socio-technical aspects of Agentic AI [20.858222661070787]
  Agentic Artificial Intelligence (AI) represents a fundamental shift in the design of intelligent systems.<n>Recent research on agentic AI has largely focused on technical foundations.<n>This paper presents a socio-technical analysis of agentic AI that explicitly connects core technical components with societal context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-26T10:56:00Z)
• World Models Should Prioritize the Unification of Physical and Social Dynamics [57.91940497010114]
  This paper argues that the systematic, bidirectional unification of physical and social predictive capabilities is the next crucial frontier for world model development.<n>We contend that comprehensive world models must holistically integrate objective physical laws with the subjective, evolving, and context-dependent nature of social dynamics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T07:42:37Z)
• Collateral Damage Assessment Model for AI System Target Engagement in Military Operations [0.0]
  The model integrates temporal, spatial, and force dimensions within a unified Knowledge Representation and Reasoning architecture.<n>The model is demonstrated and evaluated through instantiation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-23T08:36:04Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• From Firms to Computation: AI Governance and the Evolution of Institutions [0.0]
  This article synthesizes three frameworks: multi-level selection theory, Aoki's view of firms as computational processes, and Ostrom's design principles for robust institutions.<n>We develop a framework where selection operates concurrently across organizational levels, firms implement distributed inference via game-theoretic architectures, and Ostrom-style rules evolve as alignment mechanisms that address AI-related risks.<n>We conclude by proposing a set of design principles that operationalize alignment between humans and AI across institutional layers, enabling scalable, adaptive, and inclusive governance of agential AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-18T02:52:58Z)
• Enterprise Architecture as a Dynamic Capability for Scalable and Sustainable Generative AI adoption: Bridging Innovation and Governance in Large Organisations [55.2480439325792]
  Generative Artificial Intelligence is a powerful new technology with the potential to boost innovation and reshape governance in many industries.<n>However, organisations face major challenges in scaling GenAI, including technology complexity, governance gaps and resource misalignments.<n>This study explores how Enterprise Architecture Management can meet the complex requirements of GenAI adoption within large enterprises.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-09T07:41:33Z)
• KERAIA: An Adaptive and Explainable Framework for Dynamic Knowledge Representation and Reasoning [46.85451489222176]
  KERAIA is a novel framework and software platform for symbolic knowledge engineering.<n>It addresses the persistent challenges of representing, reasoning with, and executing knowledge in dynamic, complex, and context-sensitive environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-07T10:56:05Z)
• Beyond Accidents and Misuse: Decoding the Structural Risk Dynamics of Artificial Intelligence [0.0]
  This paper advances the concept of structural risk by introducing a framework grounded in complex systems research.<n>We classify structural risks into three categories: antecedent structural causes, antecedent AI system causes, and deleterious feedback loops.<n>To anticipate and govern these dynamics, the paper proposes a methodological agenda incorporating scenario mapping, simulation, and exploratory foresight.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T05:44:50Z)
• Levels of AGI for Operationalizing Progress on the Path to AGI [53.28828093836034]
  We propose a framework for classifying the capabilities and behavior of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) models and their precursors.<n>This framework introduces levels of AGI performance, generality, and autonomy, providing a common language to compare models, assess risks, and measure progress along the path to AGI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-04T17:44:58Z)
• A multidomain relational framework to guide institutional AI research and adoption [0.0]
  We argue that research efforts aimed at understanding the implications of adopting AI tend to prioritize only a handful of ideas. We propose a simple policy and research design tool in the form of a conceptual framework to organize terms across fields.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-17T16:33:01Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.