Cryptographic Runtime Governance for Autonomous AI Systems: The Aegis Architecture for Verifiable Policy Enforcement

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.16938v1
• Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2026 04:04:57 GMT
• Title: Cryptographic Runtime Governance for Autonomous AI Systems: The Aegis Architecture for Verifiable Policy Enforcement
• Abstract summary: This paper presents Aegis, a runtime governance architecture for autonomous AI systems.<n>Aegis treats policy and legal constraints as execution conditions rather than advisory principles.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Contemporary AI governance frameworks rely heavily on post hoc oversight, policy guidance, and behavioral alignment techniques, yet these mechanisms become fragile as systems gain autonomy, speed, and operational opacity. This paper presents Aegis, a runtime governance architecture for autonomous AI systems that treats policy and legal constraints as execution conditions rather than advisory principles. Aegis binds each governed agent to a cryptographically sealed Immutable Ethics Policy Layer (IEPL) at system genesis and enforces external emissions through an Ethics Verification Agent (EVA), an Enforcement Kernel Module (EKM), and an Immutable Logging Kernel (ILK). Amendments to the governing policy layer require quorum approval and redeclaration of the system trust root; verified violations trigger autonomous shutdown and generation of auditable proof artifacts. We evaluate the architecture within the Civitas runtime using three operational measures: proof verification latency under tamper conditions, publication overhead, and alignment retention performance relative to an ungoverned baseline. In controlled trials, Aegis demonstrates median proof verification latency of 238 ms, median publication overhead of approximately 9.4 ms, and higher alignment retention than the baseline condition across matched tasks. We argue that these results support a shift in AI governance from discretionary oversight toward verifiable runtime constraint. Rather than claiming to resolve machine ethics in the abstract, the proposed architecture seeks to show that policy violating behavior can be rendered operationally non executable within a controlled runtime governance framework. The paper concludes by discussing methodological limits, evidentiary implications, and the role of proof oriented governance in high assurance AI deployment.

Related papers

• Governing at Machine Speed: An Adaptive Intelligence Architecture for Real-Time AI Policy Enforcement [0.0]
  Enterprise AI adoption has reached 78% of organizations globally, yet the infrastructure to govern that adoption has not kept pace.<n>We propose AGIL, a conceptual five-layer architecture designed to use machine learning for real-time AI governance enforcement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-11T19:35:00Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Embodied Intelligence: A Systems Framework and Graded Trustworthiness Levels [53.63220028820581]
  Embodied intelligence integrates learned perception and decision making with real-time computation, control, and physical interaction.<n>We define trustworthy embodied intelligence as the sustained capacity to execute specified tasks reliably.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-28T17:50:44Z)
• Deontic Policies for Runtime Governance of Agentic AI Systems [2.1095754823099657]
  We propose AgenticRei, which realizes key governance requirements such as obligations, dispensations, policy conflict resolutions, and reasoning over policies.<n>Our approach composes naturally with industry-standard frameworks like A2AS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-17T18:02:07Z)
• Ethical Hyper-Velocity (EHV): A Provably Deterministic Governance-Aware JIT Compiler Architecture for Agentic Systems [0.0]
  We introduce Ethical Hyper-VeCR, a framework for the formal verification of AI governance policies at runtime.<n>EHV relocates the Policy Enforcement Point (PEP) into the inference pipeline via a Governance-Aware Just-In-TimeJIT Compiler.<n>We prove that O(1) enforcement can eliminate the traditional trade-off between deployment velocity and governance, reducing Governance from O(days) to O(1).
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T06:15:51Z)
• PolicyBank: Evolving Policy Understanding for LLM Agents [51.86716874651299]
  PolicyBank maintains structured, tool-level policy insights and iteratively refines them.<n>PolicyBank closes up to 82% of the gap toward a human oracle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-16T20:29:30Z)
• When Should a Robot Think? Resource-Aware Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning for Embodied Robotic Decision-Making [68.12864562049957]
  Embodied robotic systems increasingly rely on large language model (LLM)-based agents to support high-level reasoning.<n>This raises a fundamental question for embodied agents: when should the agent reason, and when should it act?<n>We propose RARRL (Resource-Aware Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning), a hierarchical framework for resource-aware orchestration of embodied agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-17T15:38:50Z)
• Verification of Robust Properties for Access Control Policies [51.736723807086385]
  Existing methods for verifying access control policies require the policy to be complete and fully determined before verification can proceed.<n>We introduce robust property verification: the problem of determining what a policy's structure commits it to regardless of how pending decisions are resolved and regardless of subsequent extension.<n>We show that despite quantifying universally over all possible policy extensions the judgment reduces to proof search in a second-order logic programming language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T17:14:38Z)
• The Controllability Trap: A Governance Framework for Military AI Agents [0.0]
  We propose the Agentic Military AI Governance Framework (AMAGF)<n>AMAGF is a measurable architecture structured around three pillars: Preventive Governance, Detective Governance, and Corrective Governance.<n>Its core mechanism, the Control Quality Score (CQS), is a composite real-time metric quantifying human control and enabling graduated responses as control weakens.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T20:48:01Z)
• Agents of Chaos [50.53354213047402]
  We report an exploratory red-teaming study of autonomous language-model-powered agents deployed in a live laboratory environment.<n>Twenty AI researchers interacted with the agents under benign and adversarial conditions.<n>Our findings establish the existence of security-, privacy-, and governance-relevant vulnerabilities in realistic deployment settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T16:28:48Z)
• Trustworthy AI Posture (TAIP): A Framework for Continuous AI Assurance of Agentic Systems at Horizontal and Vertical scale [1.0896567381206714]
  Point-in-time, document-based audits cannot keep pace with non deterministic behaviour.<n>Crisis is dual-scale: vertically, governance and control obligations change faster than frameworks can operationalise them.<n>Risk-based regulation now requires organisations to demonstrate ongoing control adequacy and effectiveness.<n>This paper reframes trustworthiness as a continuously generated signal rather than a static certificate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-15T10:49:47Z)
• Mirror: A Multi-Agent System for AI-Assisted Ethics Review [104.3684024153469]
  Mirror is an agentic framework for AI-assisted ethical review.<n>It integrates ethical reasoning, structured rule interpretation, and multi-agent deliberation within a unified architecture.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-09T03:38:55Z)
• Preventing the Collapse of Peer Review Requires Verification-First AI [49.995126139461085]
  We propose truth-coupling, i.e. how tightly venue scores track latent scientific truth.<n>We formalize two forces that drive a phase transition toward proxy-sovereign evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-23T17:17:32Z)
• The Loss of Control Playbook: Degrees, Dynamics, and Preparedness [39.39076397908963]
  This report addresses the absence of an actionable definition for Loss of Control (LoC) in AI systems by developing a novel taxonomy and preparedness framework.<n>We propose a graded LoC taxonomy, based on the metrics of severity and persistence, that distinguishes between Deviation, Bounded LoC, and Strict LoC.<n>We put forward a plan to maintain preparedness and prevent the occurrence of LoC outcomes should a state of societal vulnerability be reached.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-19T20:10:39Z)
• Making LLMs Reliable When It Matters Most: A Five-Layer Architecture for High-Stakes Decisions [51.56484100374058]
  Current large language models (LLMs) excel in verifiable domains where outputs can be checked before action but prove less reliable for high-stakes strategic decisions with uncertain outcomes.<n>This gap, driven by mutually cognitive biases in both humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems, threatens the defensibility of valuations and sustainability of investments in the sector.<n>This report describes a framework emerging from systematic qualitative assessment across 7 frontier-grade LLMs and 3 market-facing venture vignettes under time pressure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T22:24:21Z)
• Policy-as-Prompt: Turning AI Governance Rules into Guardrails for AI Agents [0.19336815376402716]
  We introduce a regulatory machine learning framework that converts unstructured design artifacts (like PRDs, TDDs, and code) into verifiable runtime guardrails.<n>Our Policy as Prompt method reads these documents and risk controls to build a source-linked policy tree.<n>System is built to enforce least privilege and data minimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-28T17:36:52Z)
• Governance-as-a-Service: A Multi-Agent Framework for AI System Compliance and Policy Enforcement [0.0]
  We introduce Governance-as-a-Service (G): a policy-driven enforcement layer that regulates agent outputs at runtime.<n>G employs declarative rules and a Trust Factor mechanism that scores agents based on compliance and severity of violations.<n>Results show that G reliably blocks or redirects high-risk behaviors while preserving throughput.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-26T07:48:55Z)
• Watermarking Without Standards Is Not AI Governance [46.71493672772134]
  We argue that current implementations risk serving as symbolic compliance rather than delivering effective oversight.<n>We propose a three-layer framework encompassing technical standards, audit infrastructure, and enforcement mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T18:10:04Z)
• Artificial Intelligence in Government: Why People Feel They Lose Control [44.99833362998488]
  The use of Artificial Intelligence in public administration is expanding rapidly.<n>While AI promises greater efficiency and responsiveness, its integration into government functions raises concerns about fairness, transparency, and accountability.<n>This article applies principal-agent theory to AI adoption as a special case of delegation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T07:46:41Z)

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.