AI Sovereignty as National Learning Capacity: A Human-Centered Learning Mechanics Viewpoint on France, the United States, and China

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.00729v1
• Date: Sat, 30 May 2026 13:49:42 GMT
• Title: AI Sovereignty as National Learning Capacity: A Human-Centered Learning Mechanics Viewpoint on France, the United States, and China
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes a unified interpretation: France should be understood as a emphnational AI learning system.<n>It argues that the French AI debate should move beyond the binary opposition between techno-optimism and regulation-first caution.
• Score: 1.1675763847424785
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial Intelligence is often discussed in France in terms of investment, compute capacity, regulation, employment, sovereignty, and education. These dimensions are usually treated separately. This viewpoint paper proposes a unified interpretation: France should be understood as a \emph{national AI learning system}. Building on Human-Centered Learning Mechanics (HCLM), recently formulated as a dynamical framework for entropy-regulated representation learning, we interpret national AI development as a controlled balance between information injection and entropy dissipation. Information injection corresponds to compute, data, talent, research, capital, industrial deployment, and institutional experimentation. Entropy dissipation corresponds to organizational complexity, coordination frictions, energy constraints, regulatory uncertainty, talent mobility pressures, and opportunities to strengthen industrial absorption. The central claim is that AI sovereignty does not emerge from scale alone but from a country's capacity to regulate its own information dynamics. This paper connects HCLM with neural scaling laws, endogenous growth theory, creative destruction, and game theory. It argues that the French AI debate should move beyond the binary opposition between techno-optimism and regulation-first caution. A competitive and human-centered AI strategy requires a controlled regime in which information injection grows faster than institutional dissipation, while avoiding unstable, unequal, or energy-intensive expansion. We provide a mathematical model, measurable policy indicators, game-theoretic propositions, illustrative simulations of national AI regimes, and concrete policy implications for France. The proposed viewpoint reframes AI policy as the governance of an open, strategic, non-equilibrium learning system.

Related papers

• AI Sovereignty: A Qualitative Model of Strategic Competition as AI Becomes an Instrument of National Power [0.0]
  AI sovereignty is the extent to which a nation independently controls its artificial intelligence (AI) technologies.<n>The model identifies key leverage points that nations can use to enhance their own growth or degrade an adversary's.<n>If our assumptions and hypotheses are valid, this strategic competition may come to define how nations improve their economic situations, competitive advantage, and overall national power in the 21st Century.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-05T13:11:39Z)
• Sovereign AI: Rethinking Autonomy in the Age of Global Interdependence [2.153445979060976]
  Artificial intelligence (AI) is emerging as a foundational general-purpose technology, raising new dilemmas of sovereignty in an interconnected world.<n>This paper develops a conceptual and formal framework for understanding sovereign AI as a continuum rather than a binary condition.<n>We present a planner's model that identifies two policy pillars: equalizing marginal returns across the four sovereignty pillars and setting openness where global benefits equal exposure risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-18T10:02:10Z)
• Three Lenses on the AI Revolution: Risk, Transformation, Continuity [1.5567685129899713]
  Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as both a continuation of historical technological revolutions and a potential rupture with them.<n>This paper argues that AI must be viewed simultaneously through three lenses: textitrisk, where it resembles nuclear technology in its irreversible and global externalities; textittransformation, where it parallels the Industrial Revolution as a general-purpose technology driving productivity and reorganization of labor; and textitcontinuity, where it extends the fifty-year arc of computing revolutions from personal computing to the internet to mobile.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-14T14:53:49Z)
• Superintelligence Strategy: Expert Version [64.7113737051525]
  Destabilizing AI developments could raise the odds of great-power conflict.<n>Superintelligence -- AI vastly better than humans at nearly all cognitive tasks -- is now anticipated by AI researchers.<n>We introduce the concept of Mutual Assured AI Malfunction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-07T17:53:24Z)
• Alignment, Agency and Autonomy in Frontier AI: A Systems Engineering Perspective [0.0]
  Concepts of alignment, agency, and autonomy have become central to AI safety, governance, and control.<n>This paper traces the historical, philosophical, and technical evolution of these concepts, emphasizing how their definitions influence AI development, deployment, and oversight.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T21:37:20Z)
• Imagining and building wise machines: The centrality of AI metacognition [78.76893632793497]
  We examine what is known about human wisdom and sketch a vision of its AI counterpart.<n>We argue that AI systems particularly struggle with metacognition.<n>We discuss how wise AI might be benchmarked, trained, and implemented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T18:10:10Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• Converging Paradigms: The Synergy of Symbolic and Connectionist AI in LLM-Empowered Autonomous Agents [55.63497537202751]
  Article explores the convergence of connectionist and symbolic artificial intelligence (AI) Traditionally, connectionist AI focuses on neural networks, while symbolic AI emphasizes symbolic representation and logic. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) highlight the potential of connectionist architectures in handling human language as a form of symbols.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-11T14:00:53Z)
• Computing Power and the Governance of Artificial Intelligence [51.967584623262674]
  Governments and companies have started to leverage compute as a means to govern AI. compute-based policies and technologies have the potential to assist in these areas, but there is significant variation in their readiness for implementation. naive or poorly scoped approaches to compute governance carry significant risks in areas like privacy, economic impacts, and centralization of power.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T21:10:21Z)
• Trust, Accountability, and Autonomy in Knowledge Graph-based AI for Self-determination [1.4305544869388402]
  Knowledge Graphs (KGs) have emerged as fundamental platforms for powering intelligent decision-making. The integration of KGs with neuronal learning is currently a topic of active research. This paper conceptualises the foundational topics and research pillars to support KG-based AI for self-determination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T12:51:52Z)
• Bridging the Global Divide in AI Regulation: A Proposal for a Contextual, Coherent, and Commensurable Framework [0.9622882291833615]
  This paper proposes an alternative contextual, coherent, and commensurable (3C) framework for regulating artificial intelligence (AI) To ensure contextuality, the framework bifurcates the AI life cycle into two phases: learning and deployment for specific tasks, instead of defining foundation or general-purpose models. To ensure commensurability, the framework promotes the adoption of international standards for measuring and mitigating risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-20T15:23:40Z)
• 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)
• An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence. The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)

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.