{
  "id": 6412,
  "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.02720v3",
  "title": "Cognitive Comparability and the Limits of Governance: Evaluating Authority Under Radical Capability Asymmetry",
  "summary": "Governance theory presupposes a rough cognitive comparability between governors and governed. This paper makes that assumption explicit and testable through a six-dimension evaluation framework covering legitimacy, accountability, corrigibility, non-domination, subsidiarity, and institutional resilience, drawn from political legitimacy theory, principal-agent models, republican theory, and the AI alignment literature. The framework is first demonstrated on existing non-majoritarian institutions,",
  "authors": "Tony Rost",
  "category": "research",
  "topics": "regulation,safety-alignment,agents-autonomy,transparency",
  "orgs": null,
  "regions": null,
  "published_at": "2026-04-03T04:26:18.000Z",
  "fetched_at": "2026-07-14T16:32:28.610Z",
  "source_slug": "arxiv-ethics",
  "source_name": "arXiv",
  "source_homepage": "https://arxiv.org",
  "ethics_ai_record_url": "https://ethics.ai/record/6412",
  "original_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.02720v3",
  "evidence_status": "source-only",
  "attribution": "via ethics.ai"
}