Machine intelligence has conquered the symbolic world but stalled at the physical one. The stall is structural: physical AI faces a cold-start deadlock -- no intelligence without data, no data without deployed intelligence. Our thesis: the deadlock is real but unevenly distributed, and the exception has a name: the artificial physical world. Buildings, industrial facilities, and infrastructure are intentionally constituted and documented: designed artifacts ship with readable archives that precede and constitute their instances; here, norms are promulgated before instances, not averaged from them. Four contributions. (i) From a four-world ontology we derive a legitimacy criterion for constitutive prior frameworks: prior extraction is legitimate if and only if the object domain is intentionally constituted and has left a readable archive; the criterion is testable through direction of fit -- deviation from a constitutive norm is a violation in the world, not a revision of the model. (ii) We establish a layering lower bound: any such framework has at least four layers -- syntax, concept, knowledge, instance -- because four construction goals pair into mutually incompatible carriers. (iii) We register deployment claims across five industrial domains and a 32-class failure-mode vocabulary. (iv) We stake the framework on five falsifiable predictions, the central one checkable on the public engineering record: if it fails, the framework fails. Semi-formal arguments back these claims (Appendix A): a Gold-type boundary on rule coverage in archiveless worlds, a decidability result for failure reduction over closed concept layers, and a boundary theorem for certificate-anchored calculi. Large language models find an honored place here -- as readers of the archive, not as the archive. First of three companion works; the companions take up the questions deliberately left open.
The concern is less with whether contemporary AI truly counts as intelligent than with why institutions increasingly treat predictive systems as if they do, and what this reclassification authorizes.
A. Tomičić, M. A. Gjorgjioska· Digital Society· 0 citations
The authors' claim is limited to this setting: measured behavioural properties were separable from substantial changes to cognition, established by intervention.
T. Marsden, Matthew Collecutt, J. Marsden· 0 citations
While artificial intelligence (AI) offers promise as a tool for efficiency and access to justice, in public administration it also threatens to reproduce the perversity in Franz Kafka’s parable “Before the Law”: systems that mimic legality while rendering the law opaque and unreachable. I develop the concept of “Digi...
This work defines strong equivalence across seven process features, assessable against human and machine cognition, and specifies design principles for GenAI that instantiate more process and preserve rather than erode human judgment and creativity.
Michael J. Richardson, Ayeh Alhasan, Cassandra L. Crone et al.· 0 citations
Generative AI encodes the majority's way of knowing as the default infrastructure of knowledge itself as the default infrastructure of knowledge itself, and law must learn to govern at that level of model training.
A structured framework in which every resemblance claim specifies the human reference class, the AI system and version, the task and context, the property compared, the measurement relation, the perturbations considered, the uncertainty of the estimate and the inference that the evidence permits is proposed.
Peng Wang, E. Law, Li-Ye Zou et al.· Physics of Life Reviews· 0 citations
Machine-learning networks can learn without detailed instructions from a designer. Those that do may offer insight into how the brain reorganizes itself during learning.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.