Delegation of Authority to AI: Three Conditions for Defensible Automated Decisions

Delegation of Authority to AI states the conditions under which a licensed professional or regulated institution may route a bounded decision function through an AI system without treating the system as a licensed or independently accountable professional. The paper identifies three independent conditions that must hold: Legal automatability: the governing legal and regulatory regime permits the function to be performed through a system. Domain validity and deployment fitness: the system has been empirically validated for the defined function, population, operating conditions, and failure modes. Runtime authorization integrity: every effect-bearing action passes through a pre-execution authorization boundary designed to be non-bypassable. The first condition belongs to law and the second to empirical validation. Only the third is a governance-architecture problem. The paper explains how the first two conditions define the permitted decision space and how the third enforces that space at runtime. It further distinguishes ABSTAIN plus authorized human override from guardrails plus human-in-the-loop, and maps the evidentiary requirements of runtime authorization integrity to the Five Tests Standard: Stop, Ownership, Replay, Escalation, and Provenance. The paper is explicit about the limits of the framework. Runtime authorization integrity does not replace professional accountability, establish decision quality, confer legal authority on the system, or cure a failure of legal automatability or domain validation. Its contribution is narrower: it makes retained authority operationally enforceable and its exercise independently reconstructable through a tamper-evident authorization artifact. This working paper is the affirmative companion to a research series on runtime authorization, including Authority versus Authorization (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21341907) and The Override Asymmetry (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19772248).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-08-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21779877
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Delegation of Authority to AI: Three Conditions for Defensible Automated Decisions

Edward Meyman
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Delegation of Authority to AI: Three Conditions for Defensible Automated Decisions

Edward Meyman
article en

Abstract

Delegation of Authority to AI states the conditions under which a licensed professional or regulated institution may route a bounded decision function through an AI system without treating the system as a licensed or independently accountable professional. The paper identifies three independent conditions that must hold: Legal automatability: the governing legal and regulatory regime permits the function to be performed through a system. Domain validity and deployment fitness: the system has been empirically validated for the defined function, population, operating conditions, and failure modes. Runtime authorization integrity: every effect-bearing action passes through a pre-execution authorization boundary designed to be non-bypassable. The first condition belongs to law and the second to empirical validation. Only the third is a governance-architecture problem. The paper explains how the first two conditions define the permitted decision space and how the third enforces that space at runtime. It further distinguishes ABSTAIN plus authorized human override from guardrails plus human-in-the-loop, and maps the evidentiary requirements of runtime authorization integrity to the Five Tests Standard: Stop, Ownership, Replay, Escalation, and Provenance. The paper is explicit about the limits of the framework. Runtime authorization integrity does not replace professional accountability, establish decision quality, confer legal authority on the system, or cure a failure of legal automatability or domain validation. Its contribution is narrower: it makes retained authority operationally enforceable and its exercise independently reconstructable through a tamper-evident authorization artifact. This working paper is the affirmative companion to a research series on runtime authorization, including Authority versus Authorization (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21341907) and The Override Asymmetry (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19772248).

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Ferghana Polytechnical Institute (UZ), Ferro (United States) (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.