Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Establishes a mathematical framework for assurance in agentic AI systems, implying enhanced safety and compliance.
Agentic AI systems operate autonomously across digital and physical environments, rendering subjective trust, post-hoc audits, and scalar scores insufficient for safety, legality, and stability. This paper introduces AEGIS Algebra, a unified mathematical framework that defines assurance as a machine-executable, multi-dimensional state governing the admissible behavior of AI artifacts. The framework rests on five load-bearing formalisms, each governing a distinct modality the others cannot express: matroid theory for structural feasibility, lattice and order theory for dominance and absorbing failure, constraint satisfaction for admissibility, three-valued evaluation logic for soundness under partial evidence, and temporal logic for validity over time. These are integrated into a single assurance space rather than treated as parallel analyses. The result is non-compensatory by construction: strong performance on one dimension cannot offset failure on another, and structurally infeasible configurations do not exist in the assurance space. Regulatory text is translated through a strict pipeline — clause → predicate → Predicate Compute Unit (PCU) → gate — in which no layer substitutes for another. The paper presents formal definitions, five theorems (including a soundness-under-partial-evidence result for predicate evaluators), geometric intuition, and worked compliance examples deriving enforceable gate decisions end-to-end from HIPAA, GDPR, and SOC 2 source clauses. The framework is presented openly to support academic engagement, regulatory adoption, and long-term extensibility. The proprietary engineering corpus required to instantiate the framework against specific regulatory regimes is maintained as a separate asset and is not part of this deposit. How to cite: Miruke, D. AEGIS Algebra: A Unified Mathematical Framework for Executable Assurance of Agentic AI Artifacts. Preprint v2.2, June 2026.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dattaram Miruke (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: