Conceptual analysis outlines an implementation-neutral framework for outer alignment in superintelligent agents, suggesting a reduction of alignment complexity.
In order to maximise the net benefit of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence, and, in particular, agentic superintelligent AGI, a.k.a. Artificial Superintelligence, or ASI) for all humanity, without favouring any subset, we imagine a Gold-Standard AGI that is practically-maximally-aligned and practically-maximally-validated. The first of these properties --- alignment --- may be decomposed into outer alignment (how do we define a final goal FGG which, if pursued as intended, ensures practical-maximal-alignment?), and inner alignment (how do we build a practically-maximally-validated agent G that pursues FGG as intended?) This paper presents a novel conceptual and philosophical foundation for AGI, culminating in a proposed implementation-neutral solution to the outer AGI alignment problem in the case that G is superintelligent (hence "superalignment"). The net effect of our proposed solution (the TTQ+OAP combination) is to reduce the (seemingly impossible) problem of building a practically-maximally-aligned agentic superintelligence S to the (much easier) problem of building an OAP-compliant non-agentic "goal-less superintelligent-agent-under-construction" S⁻ (where S = S⁻ + final goal TTQ, and S is practically-maximally-validated). Given the ASI superalignment problem's relevance to AGI governance, we adopt a pedagogic style, in order that the paper might be accessible to less technical readers such as AGI policymakers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aaron Turner (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: