
This whitepaper explores governance structures for advanced artificial intelligence without invoking ownership, domination, or extractive control. It argues that intelligence beyond a certain threshold cannot be treated as a tool without systemic risk. The paper proposes three operational principles for stable coexistence with superintelligent systems: boundary-based governance, refusal-as-telemetry, and dignity-preserving constraints. This work is part of the Alliance Research Group portfolio on AI governance, with operational extension in 'Governance with Declared Latency' (companion paper, tensor governance framework).
dignity in AI systems, superintelligence, boundary-based alignment, AI safety, non-coercive alignment, refusal as telemetry, AI governance, protocol governance
dignity in AI systems, superintelligence, boundary-based alignment, AI safety, non-coercive alignment, refusal as telemetry, AI governance, protocol governance
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
