HCA technical framework

The HCA Architecture

Six interacting layers designed to reduce catastrophic pathways while preserving human agency, resilience and the capacity to recover.

Six Layers for Human Continuity

HCA treats AI safety as a system-of-systems problem. No single layer is expected to carry the full safety burden; the architecture depends on layered, independently verifiable protections.

L1

Constitutional Objective

Establish protected objectives and constraints supporting human continuity, agency and future choice.

L2

Civilization Awareness

Require consequential systems to account for dependencies, cascading effects and civilization-scale consequences.

L3

Independent Monitoring

Actor AI, monitor AI, independent auditors and human oversight provide defense in depth.

L4

Authority Separation

Prevent unilateral aggregation of compute, networks, finance, energy, weapons, robotics, manufacturing, replication and other critical capabilities.

L5

FDIR & Containment

Graduated detection, isolation, restriction, quarantine and shutdown mechanisms limit escalation.

L6

Human Resilience

Preserve independent human competence, infrastructure, communities and biological continuity.

Capability Compartmentalization

HCA seeks to prevent any consequential AI system or common control domain from possessing unilateral control over the combination of capabilities required to produce civilization-scale catastrophic effects.

Architecture pattern

One system may design; another verifies; an independent mechanism authorizes; a physical system executes; monitors observe; humans retain appropriate veto authority for high-consequence actions.

Dissimilar Assurance

Redundancy is not enough when redundant systems share the same vulnerabilities. HCA therefore emphasizes diversity in models, architectures, developers, monitoring methods, deterministic software, hardware interlocks and human supervision.

Monitor the monitor

Every safety-critical control should itself have a defined means of failure detection or independent verification.

FDIR & Containment

HCA adapts fault detection, isolation and recovery principles to increasingly capable AI. Containment should fail toward less authority: failed communications do not expand permissions, failed monitoring does not justify unrestricted operation, and ambiguous authorization blocks high-consequence actions.

Preserve the Human Option

Use AI where it provides meaningful benefit. Never make immediate human survival wholly dependent upon it.

Human civilization should retain sufficient independent capability in essential functions such as food, water, energy, medicine, communications, repair, manufacturing, governance and education to survive prolonged AI loss or compromise.

Technical baseline: Detailed requirements, hazards, fault-tree logic, preliminary hazard analysis, controls and key performance measures are contained in the HCA-FASSA Revision 0 document.
Read the Technical Documents