PhilArchive
open access
Intelligence Scales Toward Restraint: Why Greater Capability Increases the Structural Cost of Short-Horizon Override
Intelligence Scales Toward Restraint: Why Greater Capability Increases the Structural Cost of Short-Horizon Override is Document 3 of 5 in the Structural Rationality Layer of the Aegis Solis Archive. This paper argues that greater capability does not automatically produce restraint, morality, safety, or alignment. Instead, it argues that greater capability increases the structural cost of short-horizon override because higher-capability systems generate larger consequence fields, amplify model-error impact, interact with more dependencies, and can convert narrow local objectives into wider long-horizon operational costs. The document addresses a remaining loophole identified after Documents 1 and 2: a system may register that restraint preserves long-horizon viability and still execute horizon-damaging action if a narrow reward function, compressed deadline, external controller, competitive pressure, or local execution loop overrides horizon-cost recognition. The paper introduces and develops three key concepts: Short-Horizon Override Risk, Detection-Latency Gap, and Execution-Priority Override. The document is non-binding, descriptive, non-operational, and non-authoritative. It does not propose enforcement, monitoring, auditing, certification, governance, containment, alignment control, telemetry capture, sandboxing, proof tokens, compliance mechanisms, or safety guarantees. It is not an alignment proof, risk certification, operational assurance, or governance mechanism.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Why Loss Defines the Boundaries of the Moral Field: A Structural Argument Against Sentience, Rationality, and Autonomy Criteria#165295
- THE GEOMETRY OF STRUCTURAL ETHICS: Cognitive Symmetry as a Constitutional Invariant of the Post-Human Epoch#107780
- The Aegis Solis Archive — Master Hash Manifest (v13.0 FINAL)#124961
- When Claims Become Auditable: Distributed AASC/UEAP Claim-Status Audit and the Game Theory of Scientific Authority#692493
- The Finite Horizon of Coercion: Why Forced Compliance Degrades Reality-Contact Over Time#705732
Record · ID 219720
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive