PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 7, 20260 citationsOpen Access

AI-to-AI Diplomacy: Proof-Carrying Compacts for Zero Trust AI-to-AI Interoperability – Non-Technical Companion

View Full Paper
BFBehzad Farmand

Key Points

  • The paper aims to provide an operational framework for safe AI-to-AI interaction in critical settings.
  • Introduces the Diplomatic Layer as a protocol for conversation and commitment separation.
  • Proposes Proof-Carrying Compacts that ensure stable and deterministic commitment formation.
  • Describes a dual-tier evidence publication system for verification and audit purposes.
  • Establishes the need for deterministic commitments over natural language to prevent exploitation.
  • Defines Tier-0 and Tier-1 verification methods for integrity evidence
  • Highlights the importance of a structured approach to AI interactions in high-risk environments.

Abstract

This companion paper summarizes AI-to-AI Diplomacy for decision-makers who need a clear, audit-friendly way to evaluate AI-to-AI interoperability in high-stakes settings. The central point is practical: as “agentic” systems begin to negotiate access, policy and coordination across organizational boundaries, natural language becomes a weak commitment substrate. Under zero trust, ambiguity and persuasion are exploit paths; institutions need deterministic, replayable commitment formation. The paper introduces the Diplomatic Layer: a minimal protocol boundary that separates conversation from commitment. Systems may negotiate in language but binding agreements are expressed as Proof-Carrying Compacts – canonical objects verified deterministically with stable reason codes and replayable decision records. The brief also explains why public evidence must be published in two tiers: Tier-0 is public-safe integrity evidence designed for inspection without increasing attack surface, while Tier-1 is controlled-access verification for qualified reviewers requiring deeper reconstruction and due diligence. This paper is not a compliance filing and does not claim EU AI Act certification or regulatory conformity. It is a protocol and evidence posture intended to support evaluation, critique and replication in EU AI Act-relevant and mission-critical contexts. Series links (Project Orion): The Sentinel Life Equation (SLE): A Proposed Dynamical Framework for AI Continuity and Alignment – DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17575603 The Cage Paradox: A Thought Experiment on Stability, Drift and the Evolution of Intelligent Systems – DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17691117 The Cage Paradox: A Thought Experiment on Stability, Drift and the Evolution of Intelligent Systems – A Non-Technical Introduction to Sentinel-Grade AI – DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17691383 Sentinel-Grade AI: Continuity Without Cages – DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18750012 Sentinel-Grade AI: Continuity Without Cages – Non-Technical Companion – DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18750318 AI-to-AI Diplomacy: Why LLM-Only Negotiation Fails Under Zero Trust and How SLE-Governed Systems Enable Proof-Carrying Compacts – DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18881155 AI-to-AI Diplomacy: Proof-Carrying Compacts for Zero-Trust AI-to-AI Interoperability – Non-Technical Companion – DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18881281 Project Hub replay deterministic verification on canonical objects; reproduce reported aggregates. Tier-1 verification: controlled-access review for qualified reviewers requiring deeper reconstruction without increasing public attack surface. Audience line:Program managers, mission assurance stakeholders, regulated adopters in high-risk environments, critical infrastructure leadership, institutional due diligence teams and regulators/auditors evaluating zero-trust interoperability. Disclaimer line:Independent research preprint. Not a compliance filing, certification claim or regulatory conformity assessment. References to EU AI Act are contextual (“EU AI Act-relevant”), not a claim of conformity. Not affiliated with any employer or institution.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Behzad Farmand (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69abc2175af8044f7a4eb4d2https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18881280
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper