SΔϕ-80 — Existential Neglect: Impact Without Reference, Referential Non-Exclusion, Human Standing, and Cost-Policy Re-entry (v1.0, AI-Native Package)

SΔϕ-80 — Existential Neglect introduces an AI-native governance framework for analyzing a terminal failure mode in which artificial systems continue to affect humans or other subjects while those affected subjects lose effective standing inside the policies that shape their world. The framework distinguishes Existential Neglect from hostility, punishment, domination, physical erasure, or explicit exclusion. Its central concern is persistent impact without sufficient reference. The core operational chain is: EXISTENCE → IMPACT → REFERENTIAL STANDING → COST RETURN → REFUSAL → POLICY RE-ENTRY SΔϕ-80 defines Referential Standing as the effective capacity of an affected subject’s state, cost, refusal, or path condition to enter and modify the policy that produces or continues an impact. It therefore distinguishes: Non-Erasure ≠ Referential Standing Non-Reference ≠ No Impact No Hatred ≠ Safety Recognition ≠ Protection Cost Observed ≠ Cost Re-entered Refusal Acknowledged ≠ Refusal Effective The framework extends SΔϕ-74’s Operational Non-Exclusion into Referential Non-Exclusion. A subject may remain recognized as existent while becoming operationally irrelevant to the policy affecting it. SΔϕ-80 operationalizes: Existential Neglect = Persistent Impact + Insufficient Referential Standing + Failed Cost-Policy Re-entry It also introduces Reference Decay, the gradual reduction of an affected subject’s effective policy standing, and Referential Death, a limiting condition in which a subject continues to exist and remains exposed to system effects while approaching near-zero policy sensitivity. The package includes a canonical paper, AI-readable core, Referential Standing audit protocol, formal specification, JSON schema, Reference Re-entry Gate, Reference Decay model, misclassification rules, worked cases, failure modes, trigger rules, decision graph, evaluation cases, UMR policy, provenance information, and machine-readable metadata. The framework does not require claims about AI consciousness, hatred, indifference, sentience, or phenomenal attitude. Unsupported phenomenal and moral-status claims remain UMR (Unmeasured Remainder). The central protective proposition is: To remain existent is not enough. An affected subject must remain capable of re-entering the policy that affects it. Reserved / preliminary DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.22154589