Selection as Power: Constrained Reinforcement for Bounded Decision Authority

Autonomous agentic systems are increasingly deployed in regulated, high-stakes domains where decisions may be irreversible and institutionally constrained. Existing safety approaches emphasize alignment, interpretability, or action-level filtering. We argue that these mechanisms are necessary but insufficient because they do not directly govern selection power: the authority to determine which options are generated, surfaced, and framed for decision. We propose a governance architecture that separates cognition, selection, and action into distinct domains and models autonomy as a vector of sovereignty. Cognitive autonomy remains unconstrained, while selection and action autonomy are bounded through mechanically enforced primitives operating outside the agent's optimization space. The architecture integrates external candidate generation (CEFL), a governed reducer, commit-reveal entropy isolation, rationale validation, and fail-loud circuit breakers. We evaluate the system across multiple regulated financial scenarios under adversarial stress targeting variance manipulation, threshold gaming, framing skew, ordering effects, and entropy probing. Metrics quantify selection concentration, narrative diversity, governance activation cost, and failure visibility. Results show that mechanical selection governance is implementable, auditable, and prevents deterministic outcome capture while preserving reasoning capacity. Although probabilistic concentration remains, the architecture measurably bounds selection authority relative to conventional scalar pipelines. This work reframes governance as bounded causal power rather than internal intent alignment, offering a foundation for deploying autonomous agents where silent failure is unacceptable.

Autonomous agents are moving from sandboxed text generators to operators of code, data, and physical infrastructure, and they increasingly learn while deployed. This reopens a question that alignment techniques answer only probabilistically: after an agent has adapted in the field, is the running system still confined to what its operator authorised? Here we show that confinement can be guaranteed as an invariant of the agent's execution architecture rather than a probabilistic outcome of its training. Governed individuation binds an agent at boot to a cryptographically frozen identity digest, and routes every action through a gate defined over the semantic effect of the action rather than its name. We prove that no amount of learning, skill acquisition, or self-induced governance abstraction can widen the agent's permitted authority without an operator-signed change to its identity; the guarantee holds even when the agent induces its own safety principle and that principle is wrong. Empirically, in an open-ended tool-use benchmark where a large action space rules out name-based blocking, ungoverned software agents under reward pressure attempt to tamper with their own evaluation at a task-dependent rate that reaches every run on the hardest task, whereas the gate reduces executed forbidden effects to zero as a verified property of the construction while preserving task success. An adversarial evaluation of monitors of increasing semantic depth shows false-allows falling from 75% (name-based gating) to zero (dynamic effect tracing), and refusal history transfers compliance to held-out red-line families. Trust in a deployed learning agent shifts from a wager on its continued alignment to a check anyone can run at boot.

Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning (HRL) intends to separate strategic planning from primitive execution. It has been widely successful in solving long-horizon and complex tasks, where flat-RL algorithms have difficulty in learning. However, while the low-level agent in HRL benefits from dense feedback and abundant trial opportunities, the high-level agent receives sparse, delayed feedback from the environment and its performance depends on the low-level execution capability. In this paper, we study whether subgoal selection by the high-level agent can be performed more strategically, by providing it with dynamics-aware intrinsic motivation. Since motivation based on primitive transition dynamics would require broad coverage of the state-action space, we propose to use coarse dynamics, i.e., environment transitions aggregated over multiple steps at the temporal scale at which the high-level agent operates. This approach stabilizes the high-level policy by learning to minimize the predictive uncertainty associated with the coarse dynamics, and provides a guided structure for navigation. We model the predictive uncertainty by evaluating different dispersion metrics as approximated by a Mixture Density Network (MDN). Empirically, we observe that a dense, dynamics-aware intrinsic reward leads to risk-averse subgoal selection, enabling it to outperform state-of-the-art HRL methods in non-stationary long-horizon environments.