A healthy stack avoids overlaps. EAC qualifies admissible external authority. A2 governs exposure. Q-Layer authorizes output. Layer 3 begins when authority becomes executable.
Direct references: EAC: minimum doctrinal decisions · EAC doctrine · EAC definition
Quick map
- EAC: admissibility of external authorities (interpretive constraints).
- A2: amplification and exposure (prioritization, attenuation, contention).
- Q-Layer: output legitimacy (authorize, suspend, refuse).
- Layer 3: executable authority (when an output triggers an action).
Minimum decision: A2 does not derive from EAC
An authority may be admissible without deserving amplification. Conversely, amplifying a non-admissible signal amounts to propagating unguided noise. The EAC/A2 separation prevents the confusion “admissible = priority.”
Minimum decision: indeterminacy hardens the Q-Layer
If an external authority is indeterminate but materially affects an answer, the Q-Layer must become stricter: explicit caution, qualification, or legitimate non-response. This protects doctrine against the manufacture of certainty.
Minimum decision: Layer 3 begins at execution
As long as one remains within information restitution, what is being governed is interpretation. As soon as an output becomes an act (agentic system, transaction, automated decision), the regime changes: authority must be governed as executable capability.
Canonical formula: EAC constrains interpretation. Layer 3 constrains executable authority.
What this map prevents
- Overpromising (“controlling what AI systems say”).
- Confusing authority with truth.
- The drift toward “one score to govern everything.”
- The slide toward implicit executable power.
