Finite-Capacity AI Constitution
A structural governance framework for accountable AI systems operating under finite capacity.
This public release proposes a constitutional framework for AI systems that operate under bounded resources, uncertainty, overload, latency constraints, safety pressure, and limited reviewability.
The central claim is simple:
Accountable AI requires more than principles, policies, or output-level constraints. Under finite capacity, an AI system must distinguish admissibility from execution, support explicit boundary acts, and preserve witness sufficient for later review.
Canonical release links
- Canonical document package DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19765326
- External-safe reference implementation DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19765899
-
GitHub repository: Synkyrian-Lab/constitutional-ai-under-finite-capacity
- Companion Expansion v1.1 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20012477
Companion Expansion v1.1
A companion bundle has been published to support the Canonical Document Package v1.0.1.
It does not revise the constitutional core. It provides navigation, failure disclosure, authority and human-review discipline, and implementation-facing evidence templates.
The expansion contains four instruments:
- Reader’s Guide / Start Here
- Failure and Disclosure Protocol
- Authority, Amendment, and Human Review Protocol
- Implementation / Evidence Template Pack
Its purpose is to make the constitutional core more institutionally readable, inspectable, and usable without reopening or revising it.
Public-facing anchors:
- Human silence is not approval.
- Failure must not disappear.
- Review comes before trust.
Core proposal
A constitutionally governed AI system should minimally preserve:
- finite-capacity discipline;
- admissibility before execution;
- explicit boundary acts such as ACCEPT, HOLD, and REFUSE;
- witness sufficient for later review;
- declared scope and non-claims;
- protected non-disclosure without erasing reviewability;
- review before trust.
This proposal is not a legal code, a complete ethics framework, or a mandatory software standard. It is a structural governance proposal intended to sit between high-level AI principles and proprietary implementation details.
Public release package
The release is organised as a structured package rather than a single paper.
For policy and governance readers
Recommended entry points:
- Policy Translation Brief
- Instrument Index
- The Finite-Capacity AI Constitution
For technical safety and evaluation readers
Recommended entry points:
- The Finite-Capacity AI Constitution
- Minimal Reviewable Evidence Specification
- Minimal Application Profile for AI Assistant Systems
Package structure
The release contains six main instruments:
-
The Finite-Capacity AI Constitution
The constitutional core. -
Constitutional Force and Applicability
Clarifies universal minimum force, governance-strengthening clauses, and profile-dependent qualifications. -
Minimal Application Profile for AI Assistant Systems
Projects the constitutional grammar into AI assistant systems. -
Minimal Reviewable Evidence Specification
States the minimum evidence surface required for constitutional claims to be inspectable. -
Questions, Limits, and Misreadings
Clarifies what the framework claims, what it does not claim, and how it should not be over-read. -
Policy Translation Brief
Translates the package into public-governance language for policy, standards, compliance, and public-authority audiences.
Note on terminology
This release uses the language of constitutional structure in a general governance sense. It is not a proposal of, or claim about, Anthropic’s Constitutional AI training method. Its focus is finite-capacity accountability: admissibility before execution, explicit boundary acts, reviewable witness, protected non-disclosure, and evidence-bearing governance.
Review and feedback
This release is intended as a public, citable, reviewable contribution to AI governance, AI safety, and accountable AI system design.
Feedback is especially welcome on:
- accountable AI under finite capacity;
- refusal and holding as reviewable boundary acts;
- evidence surfaces for constitutional claims;
- protected non-disclosure with preserved reviewability;
- applicability to AI assistants and advanced AI evaluation.
Contact: research@synkyria.uk