Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a governance architecture for autonomous agents that separates cognition, selection, and action, focusing on bounding "selection power"—the agent's authority to determine which options are considered. The architecture uses mechanically enforced primitives outside the agent's optimization space, including external candidate generation, a governed reducer, commit-reveal entropy isolation, rationale validation, and fail-loud circuit breakers. Experiments in regulated financial scenarios demonstrate that this architecture can limit deterministic outcome capture and improve auditability, even though probabilistic concentration remains a challenge.
Forget aligning AI intent: mechanically bounding an agent's "selection power" – its ability to determine which options are even considered – offers a more direct path to safe deployment in high-stakes domains.
Autonomous agentic systems are increasingly deployed in regulated, high-stakes domains where decisions may be irreversible and institutionally constrained. Existing safety approaches emphasize alignment, interpretability, or action-level filtering. We argue that these mechanisms are necessary but insufficient because they do not directly govern selection power: the authority to determine which options are generated, surfaced, and framed for decision. We propose a governance architecture that separates cognition, selection, and action into distinct domains and models autonomy as a vector of sovereignty. Cognitive autonomy remains unconstrained, while selection and action autonomy are bounded through mechanically enforced primitives operating outside the agent's optimization space. The architecture integrates external candidate generation (CEFL), a governed reducer, commit-reveal entropy isolation, rationale validation, and fail-loud circuit breakers. We evaluate the system across multiple regulated financial scenarios under adversarial stress targeting variance manipulation, threshold gaming, framing skew, ordering effects, and entropy probing. Metrics quantify selection concentration, narrative diversity, governance activation cost, and failure visibility. Results show that mechanical selection governance is implementable, auditable, and prevents deterministic outcome capture while preserving reasoning capacity. Although probabilistic concentration remains, the architecture measurably bounds selection authority relative to conventional scalar pipelines. This work reframes governance as bounded causal power rather than internal intent alignment, offering a foundation for deploying autonomous agents where silent failure is unacceptable.
