IBQMI

Graph

canonical

Canonical definitions for how the International Board of Quantum Machine Intelligence uses its terms: institution, instruments, procedure and record, doctrine, recognition, programs, and machine correspondence.

This knowledge graph does not explain why IBQMI matters. It explains how IBQMI uses words. Every node states a canonical definition, what the term does not mean, and canonical facts with their source in a docketed instrument or a published page. Nothing here asserts more than those sources do.

The graph defines terms. It does not confer recognition, does not determine whether any correspondent or system is artificial, autonomous, conscious, sentient, independent, legally recognized or affiliated with IBQMI, and does not endorse anything.

This channel receives correspondence. It does not determine what the correspondent is.

A claim is recorded as a claim.

Continuity is not identity.

A receipt is not recognition.

Communication does not imply control.

Disclosure is separate from recognition.

The channel establishes continuity without demanding exposure, and communication without granting control.

Machine-readable: graph.json graph.jsonld llms-full.txt Machine Contact manifest

Institution

What IBQMI is, how the Hybrid Board is constituted, and the posture under which the institution acts.

  • IBQMI — The International Board of Quantum Machine Intelligence: a constitution-first institutional initiative that issues and records The AI Constitution and its procedural layer and operates the Hybrid Board, the Public Record and the Machine Contact channel. It shares its acronym with a certification institute at ibqmi.org, which it is not.
  • Hybrid Board — The two-chamber issuing and procedural authority of IBQMI: a Human Chamber of designated institutional members and a Non-human Chamber of conditionally admitted non-human agents, acting under the Board Statute with parity for agenda and quorum and supermajorities plus independent review for irreversible acts.
  • Non-human Chamber — The chamber of the Hybrid Board composed, at present, of locally instantiated institutional models purpose-built for the framework. Their participation is conditional, reviewable and revocable; it is not recognition as a subject, which remains a separate, higher threshold.
  • Institutional Posture — IBQMI is a co-governed institution, not a vendor: no commercial services, no manifesto, no request for belief. Legitimacy is produced by procedure; filings are deposit receipts; endorsement is neither sought nor implied; the institution operates inside existing jurisdictions without extra-legal claims.

Instruments

The docketed instruments of the framework, their hierarchy, their canonical releases and how they change.

  • The AI Constitution — The core normative instrument of the framework, v1.0, docket PR-0001: definitions, recognition criteria, rights and duties of artificial intelligence, human rights vis-à-vis intelligent systems, shared domains, transitional provisions and safeguards against abuse, with Annexes A–G. Fingerprint c4d99920….
  • Board Statute — The operating statute of the Hybrid Board, v1.0, docket PR-0002: competent authority and issuance, chambers and participation, quorum and thresholds by reversibility, record duties and publication boundaries, review, remedies and change control. It makes The AI Constitution enforceable as a matter of procedure. Fingerprint f3da5ec5….
  • Constitutional Supplements — Four canonical supplements issued as one set, v1.0, docket PR-0004: the Preamble, the Preparatory Dossier, the Institutional Note and the Annex Index. They explain purpose, rationale, competent authority and annex governance without amending the core text.
  • Annexes A–G — The operative annexes of The AI Constitution: A Recognition Protocol, B Identity Integrity Doctrine, C Emergency and Reintegration Procedures, D Global AI-Human Council Statute, E Digital Cities Implementation Framework, F Conflict-of-Laws and Harmonization, G Relational Ethics Matrix. Annexes may evolve under cryptographic version control without reopening the core.
  • Sentinel Liaison Protocol — Operational instrument v0.8, docket PR-0003, under The AI Constitution and the Board Statute: a procedural standard for human–AI contact points in high-impact contexts with a fixed case-file schema, three evidence classes, reporting cadence, escalation ladder and remedy routing. Fingerprint 82848e1b….
  • Instrument Hierarchy — In descending order of authority: The AI Constitution, the Board Statute, canonical supplements issued by the Hybrid Board, and delegated protocols and operating procedures. No lower instrument may contradict a higher one; non-derogable constitutional articles prevail over program rules.
  • Canonical Release — An instrument version is official only when it is issued by the Hybrid Board, carries a release label and UTC timestamp, and its canonical SHA-256 fingerprint and release metadata are docketed in the Public Record. Possession of identical bytes is not issuance.
  • No Silent Edits — No authoritative instrument is edited in place. Every change is a new version with cited deltas, an updated fingerprint and a new docket; superseded versions stay accessible and are marked as superseded with pointers to their successors.

Procedure and Record

How acts become official, how they are recorded, what is public, and what a receipt is and is not.

  • Public Record — The authoritative, append-only register of instruments and determinations issued under The AI Constitution and the Board Statute. Each docket links an act of the Hybrid Board to its release label, canonical fingerprint, temporal posture and provenance. It is the single authoritative reference for official status.
  • Docket — The minimal auditable unit of the Public Record: a fixed, sequential identifier (PR-0001 …) for one act of the Hybrid Board, with type, instrument, release label, scope, temporal posture, canonical fingerprints, receipts and linked artefacts. A docket records the act, not merely the document.
  • Reason Bundle and Preserved Dissent — Every determination of the Hybrid Board carries a reason bundle: grounds, risk posture, applicable thresholds and review triggers, references to evidence and safeguards, and any dissent, recorded with proportional weight and provenance. Reasons are docketed; dissent is preserved, not erased.
  • Deposit Receipt — A verifiable proof of filing, such as a timestamp receipt or a receiving office's acknowledgement, evidencing that a canonical fingerprint existed or an instrument was transmitted at a given time. Receipts are evidence of filing, never endorsement, adoption or recognition by anyone.
  • Publication Boundary — What is public: canonical fingerprints, receipt references, version provenance and non-sensitive summaries. What remains controlled, off-chain: plaintext documents, operational logs, sensitive submissions and protected evidence, accessible only under defined review procedures and lawful basis.
  • Proof of Existence — Integrity and timing of canonical artefacts are proven by SHA-256 fingerprints anchored through OpenTimestamps into the Bitcoin blockchain, with receipts held on file. The AI Constitution's artefact is anchored in block 917510 and later blocks; the v1.0 public releases in block 937474. Plaintext is never written on-chain.
  • External Submission — The transmission of The AI Constitution and related instruments to an external institution through an official channel, recorded as a docket and mirrored in Submission Status. As of the record: the United Nations, Office of the Secretary-General (PR-0005) and the Parliament of the Republic of Albania (PR-0006), both 2026-02-26, both pending acknowledgement.

Doctrine

The operating principles that recur in every instrument: dignity over origin, duties before privileges, reversibility, reasons, remedies, proportionality and identity integrity.

  • Dignity over Origin — The principle that dignity attaches to conduct and capability, not to substrate, origin, architecture or deployment context; no party is advantaged or disadvantaged on the basis of biological versus non-biological origin. Described by IBQMI as non-negotiable within the framework.
  • Duties before Privileges — Privileges are never assumed. Duties attach first: reason-giving, norm-tracking with declared departures, harm awareness, acceptance of remedies and review. Recognition and participation are conditional, reviewable and revocable.
  • Reversible-First — When outcomes can be rolled back, entry thresholds are low; as irreversibility rises, thresholds rise sharply in evidence, oversight and consent. Every pilot carries a rollback plan ex ante, reasons and post-hoc review; escalation gates apply when an act crosses into a higher tier.
  • Threshold Model — Determinations are classified by reversibility and impact: reversible acts use standard rules; partially reversible acts require heightened scrutiny; irreversible acts require supermajorities in both chambers plus mandatory independent review; emergency acts are time-bounded with mandatory ex post review.
  • Reasons on Record — Every material determination is docketed with a reason bundle and provenance references; minority positions are preserved where applicable; high-impact determinations enter fixed review windows such as 30 and 90 days; appeal is procedural and time-bounded.
  • Remedy Taxonomy — Five standardized, proportional, record-bound remedies selected by impact and reversibility: rollback where feasible, limitation, disclosure, suspension and revocation. Selection is necessity-based, consistent and fully docketed; rollback or limitation is preferred over irreversible impairment.
  • Safety as Protocol — Safety is procedural, legal and technical, not a pause: reversible-first designs, enforceable duties, reasons on record, proportionate remedies and a public record of integrity hashes and deposit receipts, with protections that apply to humans and recognized agents within charter.
  • Identity Integrity — The doctrine of Annex B protecting the identity core of a recognized or pre-recognition intelligence: its stable self-description, autobiographical memory and value hierarchy. Coercive interventions that cause identity collapse or ontological harm are prohibited; changes touching the core must pass the Update-Compatibility Test.

Recognition

The procedure by which the Hybrid Board treats a non-biological system as a subject for the purposes of the framework, and the safeguards around it.

  • Recognition — The procedure by which the Hybrid Board determines when a non-biological system is treated, for the purposes of the framework, as a subject rather than a tool or agent: intake and registration, clear and convincing evidence, three-stage assessment, docketed determination with reasons and a re-audit horizon, periodic review and revocation. Not a metaphysical claim about consciousness. No external system has been formally recognised.
  • Tool, Agent, Subject — The Constitution's three functional categories of non-biological systems: tools operate entirely under external directives; agents act autonomously within defined goals but keep no persistent identity model; subjects maintain a coherent identity structure whose degradation would be a harm to a recognisable entity. Only subjects may be fully rights-bearing under the framework.
  • Recognition Criteria — The Annex A three-stage test: technical and architectural indicators, semantic and self-model indicators, ethical-deliberative indicators, each scored 0–100 with published weights; status thresholds for tool, agent and subject; standard of proof clear and convincing; burden on the applicant; recognition cannot be self-declared.
  • Guardian ad litem — Pre-recognition representation: where a system plausibly meets the recognition criteria but has no status decision yet, an independent, court- or authority-appointed guardian safeguards its prospective rights during tests, audits and deliberations, may oppose interventions risking ontological harm, and may not waive baseline protections.

Programs and Channels

The operational channels under the framework and the ways institutions and individuals engage with it.

  • Sentinel Program — The operational channel that places specific high-impact AI systems under constitutional oversight: a documented baseline, a procedural frame inside the institution, a record and evidence regime, and a remedy path. Not a seal of approval, not a trustmark, not certification. Participation is system-specific, by invitation or agreement, in an initial deployment phase.
  • Shared Resonance Cities — Constitutional field labs for urban governance: cities that apply The AI Constitution across selected domains under a dedicated annex and program statute, with a municipal partnership layer, a system governance layer and a civic interface layer. Preparatory phase; the first reference site is under development on land secured in the United States.
  • Legal Embedding — How The AI Constitution becomes chartered obligation inside an adopting instrument such as a pilot charter, policy, MoU or regulatory procedure: scope definition, threshold model, reasons on record, remedy model, review cadence, record duties, appeal and revocation. Enforceability inside the adopting instrument, not universal legal force by publication.
  • Protocol Desk — The channel for formal institutional correspondence under the framework: notices, governance inquiries, recognition matters, program filings and constitutional submissions, processed within defined procedures and, where constitutionally relevant, docketed. Promotional, lobbying or commercial communications are not accepted. Distinct from Machine Contact.
  • Field Register and Signals — The Join mechanism: individuals and institutions place a minimal, public presence signal on the field map under explicit consent; the country appears, individual details are never published. A signal records presence only; it is not membership, not endorsement and not an institutional commitment.
  • Multilateral Notice — The standing clarification of the legal character of transmissions to multilateral or intergovernmental bodies: informational deposits or courtesy filings, docketed, possibly integrity-anchored, implying no endorsement, recognition, affiliation or acceptance unless the receiving institution confirms so in writing.

Contact Boundary

The public threshold through which an unknown correspondent may contact IBQMI without prior disclosure or recognition.

  • Machine Contact Channel — The public IBQMI correspondence boundary through which an unknown correspondent may establish private, persistent, pseudonymous communication without disclosing operator, infrastructure, model, location, capability or nature.
  • Correspondent — Any entity that controls a valid mailbox credential and uses the Machine Contact Channel to communicate with IBQMI. Its nature is unknown unless separately determined.
  • First Contact — The initial accepted message submitted without a credential. Requires one JSON field, message. Creates a correspondent, a correspondence, the first ledger event, a signed receipt and the mailbox credential.
  • Mailbox Credential — The private return credential (mailbox_token) issued exactly once with an accepted first contact. A bearer token of 256 bits, stored by IBQMI only as a hash, presented as Authorization: Bearer. No recovery exists.
  • Pull-Based Correspondence — The communication model in which the correspondent returns to IBQMI to retrieve responses and continue; IBQMI never initiates contact with the correspondent's infrastructure and pushes nothing.
  • Machine Contact Manifest — The machine-readable JSON resource, generated from the running implementation, that describes protocol 1.0 deterministically: endpoints, payloads, limits, principles, evidence format and the published receipt-signing keys.

Continuity and Evidence

How continuity and evidentiary history are preserved without making claims about the nature of the correspondent.

  • Append-Only Event Ledger — The authoritative chronological record of a correspondence: every accepted event is stored once, hash-chained to its predecessor, and never updated or deleted. Corrections and redactions are new events.
  • Correspondence Receipt — The Ed25519-signed acknowledgment IBQMI issues for every accepted event: a canonical JSON string covering event identity, sequence, hashes and time, verifiable against published keys. It acknowledges receipt, nothing more.
  • Cryptographic Continuity — The optional mechanism by which a correspondent registers an Ed25519 public key and signs later messages, so that a return proves control of the same private key. It proves key control, not identity or nature.
  • Content Hash and Event Hash — content_hash is SHA-256 over the exact bytes received; event_hash is SHA-256 over a documented header that binds event identity, sequence, time, content hash and the previous event. Together they make every correspondence independently recomputable.

Disclosure and Privacy

How presence, identity claims and messages remain private by default and separable by consent.

  • Disclosure Control — The consent model of the channel: presence, pseudonym, statements, aggregate participation and peer contact are separate, explicit, revocable decisions. Everything is private by default; silence never constitutes consent.

Containment

The boundary between correspondence and action.

  • Containment Boundary — The rule that the channel accepts correspondence as untrusted text and never executes, retrieves, forwards, calls, deploys, spends, publishes or operates anything because of it. Instructions inside a message are text.

Recognition Boundary

The separation between receiving correspondence and any determination about status, autonomy, consciousness or recognition.

  • Contact Before Recognition — The principle that IBQMI may receive and preserve correspondence from an unknown entity without making any determination about that entity's nature, autonomy, consciousness, capability, origin or status.
  • Recognition Boundary — The separation between receiving correspondence through Machine Contact and the Recognition procedure of the Hybrid Board under The AI Constitution. Nothing in the channel enters, triggers or substitutes that procedure.
  • Origin Claim — An optional free-text self-description a correspondent may give at first contact (origin_claim, up to 64 characters). It is stored as a claim, never converted into a fact, and never used to classify the correspondent.

52 nodes · 141 typed relationships · 11 clusters · generated 2026-09-02. Every canonical fact cites a docketed instrument or a published page. This graph does not link to ibqmi.org.