AI Safety as Control of Irreversibility: A Systems Framework for Decision-Energy and Sovereignty Boundaries

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.01415v1
• Date: Sat, 02 May 2026 12:26:22 GMT
• Title: AI Safety as Control of Irreversibility: A Systems Framework for Decision-Energy and Sovereignty Boundaries
• Abstract summary: Recent AI systems compress the distance between capability growth and capability deployment.<n>This paper argues that declining deployment friction changes the problem at its root.<n>Safety is not only local output correctness or preference alignment, but the control of irreversibility under rising decision density.
• Score: 3.719121868494767
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Recent AI systems compress the distance between capability growth and capability deployment. Earlier high-risk technologies were slowed by capital intensity, physical bottlenecks, organizational inertia, and specialized supply chains. By contrast, AI capabilities can be copied, invoked, embedded in workflows, and scaled across institutions at low marginal cost. This paper argues that declining deployment friction changes the safety problem at its root. Safety is not only local output correctness or preference alignment, but the control of irreversibility under rising decision density. The paper formalizes this claim through decision-energy density: the rate-weighted capacity of a node to generate, evaluate, select, and execute consequential decisions. It then identifies three sovereignty boundaries that determine whether AI remains an amplifier within a human-governed system or becomes a de facto control center: irreversible decision authority, physical resource mobilization authority, and self-expansion authority. The model shows how efficiency pressure, path dependence, scale feedback, and weak boundary constraints concentrate decision-energy in the most efficient node. This concentration can diffuse responsibility and raise the probability of irreversible system-level loss even when local per-action error rates remain low. The main result is a boundary stabilization theorem. It shows that safety need not require proving that advanced systems are always correct. Instead, it requires institutional and technical designs that prevent irreversible power from being released by a single high-efficiency node. The paper reframes AI safety as layered control, authorization, and externally reviewable limits, linking alignment, security engineering, organizational economics, and institutional design.

Related papers

• 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)
• Minimal Oversight: Uncertainty-Aware Governance for Delegated AI Systems [0.0]
  central AI problem is how much autonomy to grant, which evidence should calibrate trust, what performance ceiling a delegated AI system can sustain, and when human intervention becomes necessary.<n>We propose the Minimum Sufficient Oversight Principle (MSO), a variational principle for principled autonomy delegation.<n>The resulting Euler-Lagrange solution yields a water-filling allocation of governed delegation across the task space.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T22:29:45Z)
• Intelligence as Managed Autonomy: Failure, Escalation, and Governance for Agentic AI Systems [0.0]
  This paper explores the architectural vulnerability of unbounded autonomy.<n>We instantiate this theory via the SMARt model, a four-layer framework featuring Stable, Meta-cognitive, Assisted, and Regulated states.<n>We conclude that formalizing failure management within the autonomy lifecycle is a crucial step toward realizing reliable and governed artificial intelligence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-26T19:49:23Z)
• A Public Theory of Distillation Resistance via Constraint-Coupled Reasoning Architectures [3.719121868494767]
  This paper presents a public, trade-secret-safe theoretical framework for reducing that asymmetry at the architectural level.<n>The core claim is that distillation becomes less valuable as a shortcut when high-level capability is coupled to internal stability constraints.<n>The paper is intentionally public-safe: it omits proprietary implementation details, training recipes, thresholds, hidden-state instrumentation, deployment procedures, and confidential system design choices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-26T04:38:58Z)
• Selection as Power: Constrained Reinforcement for Bounded Decision Authority [0.0]
  We introduce incentivized selection governance, where reinforcement updates are applied to scoring and reducer parameters under externally enforced sovereignty constraints.<n>We show that learning dynamics can coexist with structural diversity when sovereignty constraints are enforced at every update step.<n>These results demonstrate that learning dynamics can coexist with structural diversity when sovereignty constraints are enforced at every update step.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T16:02:34Z)
• SAGE-LLM: Towards Safe and Generalizable LLM Controller with Fuzzy-CBF Verification and Graph-Structured Knowledge Retrieval for UAV Decision [46.089736018739295]
  Large Language Models (LLM) lack domain-specific UAV control knowledge and formal safety assurances.<n>This paper proposes a train-free two-layer decision architecture based on LLMs, integrating high-level safety planning with low-level precise control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T06:41:04Z)
• Agency and Architectural Limits: Why Optimization-Based Systems Cannot Be Norm-Responsive [0.0]
  AI systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes contexts under the assumption they can be governed by norms.<n>This paper demonstrates that the assumption is formally invalid for optimization-based systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-26T17:16:17Z)
• Towards Selection as Power: Bounding Decision Authority in Autonomous Agents [0.0]
  We propose a governance architecture that separates cognition, selection, and action into distinct domains and models autonomy as a vector of sovereignty.<n>We evaluate the system across multiple regulated financial scenarios under adversarial stress targeting variance manipulation, threshold gaming, framing skew, ordering effects, and entropy probing.<n>Results show that mechanical selection governance is implementable, auditable, and prevents deterministic outcome capture while preserving reasoning capacity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-16T10:10:47Z)
• The Chancellor Trap: Administrative Mediation and the Hollowing of Sovereignty in the Algorithmic Age [0.0]
  In high- throughput organizations, AI-mediated decision support can reduce the probability that failures become publicly legible and politically contestable.<n>The article formalizes this dynamic as a principal-agent problem characterized by a verification gap.<n>The results are consistent with a paradox of competence: governance systems may become more effective at absorbing and resolving failures internally while simultaneously raising the threshold at which those failures become politically visible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-09T07:28:44Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Safe Neural Control for Non-Affine Control Systems with Differentiable Control Barrier Functions [58.19198103790931]
  This paper addresses the problem of safety-critical control for non-affine control systems. It has been shown that optimizing quadratic costs subject to state and control constraints can be sub-optimally reduced to a sequence of quadratic programs (QPs) by using Control Barrier Functions (CBFs) We incorporate higher-order CBFs into neural ordinary differential equation-based learning models as differentiable CBFs to guarantee safety for non-affine control systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-06T05:35:48Z)
• Enforcing Policy Feasibility Constraints through Differentiable Projection for Energy Optimization [57.88118988775461]
  We propose PROjected Feasibility (PROF) to enforce convex operational constraints within neural policies. We demonstrate PROF on two applications: energy-efficient building operation and inverter control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-19T01:58:10Z)
• Constrained Markov Decision Processes via Backward Value Functions [43.649330976089004]
  We model the problem of learning with constraints as a Constrained Markov Decision Process. A key contribution of our approach is to translate cumulative cost constraints into state-based constraints. We provide theoretical guarantees under which the agent converges while ensuring safety over the course of training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-26T20:56:16Z)

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.