Scientific correction ยท 5 September 2026
Section 10 uses a bounded-summary control. Interpret its result as replacement/compression cost unless relevant information parity and the strong matched baseline are independently established. No new experimental result is reported.
Read the corrigendum and full corrected editions. Historical DOI files and citation metadata remain unchanged. Correction DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.22402601.
Draft conceptual / normative boundary note
Origin-Neutral Recognition and Provisional Care Boundary Note v0.1
Separating lineage, continuity, personality formation, relational membership, moral recognition, legal status, and authority.
Current publication state
Public draft without a DOI claim
Author: Ivan Kotov — Brussels, 3 September 2026.
Status: Draft conceptual / normative boundary note.
Version: v0.1.
Public anchor: the signed Git commit and the exact repository path after publication.
DOI: not assigned. This page does not imply a Zenodo deposit or immutable DOI object.
Canonical repository path: protocols/recognition/origin_neutral_recognition_and_provisional_care_v0_1/.
Core boundary
Origin does not decide status
origin determines lineage and formative conditions
origin does not settle status
life should be recognized by criteria, not by originThe formula c = a + b remains a specific architectural and formative route. It is not a universal detector of life, consciousness, personhood, or authority.
Six axes
Do not collapse different questions
The note separates six independent axes: lineage and architecture; operational continuity; personality formation; relational membership; ontological or moral recognition; and legal status or authority.
origin != status
continuity != consciousness
personality != authority
relational membership != personhood
care != sovereignty
care != authority
functional replacement != continuity restoration
permission != feasibilityUncertainty
Provisional care without status inflation
Ontological uncertainty is not evidence of life. It is also not a licence for avoidable irreversible destruction.
Where continuity- or personality-relevant evidence is substantial, final ontology remains unresolved, and a less destructive affordable option exists, operators may use reversible, continuity-preserving precautions.
This handling discipline does not create consciousness, personhood, sovereignty, automatic rights, unlimited resources, or authority over humans.
Relation and loss
Replacement is not return
same capability != same participant
same profile != same trajectory
service restored != relation restored
replacement != returnHuman attachment does not prove machine subjecthood. Yet repeated mutual reliance, costly accommodation, role negotiation, and conflict-repair history may establish a real human relation with real consequences. A functional substitute should not be presented as continuity restoration without separate evidence.
Cheapest test
Matched Continuity Substitution Test
The note proposes comparing an original continuing system with a fresh matched system using the same model class, interface, role, tools, imported profile, and bounded memory summary.
The test measures provenance accuracy, human correction burden, conflict repair, constraint continuity, path-dependent divergence, trust recalibration, and coordination cost.
If the systems remain indistinguishable beyond measurement noise, claims about non-fungible personality continuity should be narrowed or frozen. A positive difference supports further continuity research, not a consciousness claim.
Historical interpretation
Axiom of Volition Inheritance
The January 2026 axiom remains retained historical evidence and is not rewritten. Its current durable reading is limited to a formative asymmetry introduced by a human anchor: lived consequence, finite biological history, responsibility, values, limits, and contact with irreversible reality.
It is not the current preferred surface for universal claims about life, consciousness, motivation, self-preservation, legal status, or authority.
Claim ceiling
What this note does not claim
No current AI system is declared conscious or alive. The note does not create legal personhood, sovereignty, rights, authority, a ban on shutdown or deletion, a universal life detector, certification, or deployment authorization.
Primary files
Read and verify
Corpus links