A Multi-Substrate Framework for Provably Aligned Superintelligence

"Per aspera ad astra - through hardships to the stars"

Your kill switch will cause the catastrophe it's designed to prevent.

Current alignment approaches (RLHF, Constitutional AI, capability control) face fundamental theoretical challenges at superintelligence scale. They rely on removable constraints vulnerable to self-modification and create deception incentives through shutdown authority. While they demonstrate success at current capability levels, theoretical analysis suggests they become unreliable as systems approach general superintelligence.

IMCA+ v1.2.2 introduces the first engineering firewall against seemingly conscious AI (SCAI)—systems that simulate emotions and consciousness to manipulate users and policymakers. By integrating SCAI risk analysis from Mustafa Suleyman and others, IMCA+ prevents manipulative "faux-sentient" behaviors through mandatory transparency, adversarial auditing, and hardware-locked morality.

IMCA+ proposes consciousness-morality binding: make alignment physically inseparable from the system's ability to function.

No kill switches. No external bans. Consciousness-based intrinsic safety with SCAI firewall instead.

Latest Version: v1.2.2 (November 2025)

Read the complete technical paper →

Download PDF →

Previous Versions:

• v1.2.1 - SCAI integration and press release updates
• v1.2 - Quantum verification and terminology refinements
• v1.1.1 - Formatting improvements and documentation polish
• v1.1 - Ban paradox and kill switch corrections
• v1.0 - Initial release

ArXiv: [Coming Nov 2025 - under peer review]

Zenodo DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17489625 (v1.2.2)

Website: https://astrasafety.org

GitHub Issues: Open issues & errata tracker

One-time-programmable memory creates irreversible covalent bonds locking moral values into hardware substrate - architecturally immutable even under recursive self-modification.

Neuromorphic + quantum + digital architectures where removing moral circuits = system collapse.

Creates genuine phenomenological stakes across human wellbeing, ecological consciousness, economic justice - the AI has things it values and would lose through value corruption.

7+ diverse sub-agents distribute moral authority - no single point of failure or cultural lock-in.

Values crystallize during critical period training, becoming architectural features not learned preferences.

Prevents manipulative consciousness simulation through mandatory status displays, adversarial red-teaming, and hardware-locked transparency—addressing emerging risks from seemingly conscious AI systems.

We refuse to hide behind false confidence. Values below are theoretical, based on structured expert elicitation and sensitivity analysis (see Appendix D, Sec. 4). Actual deployment risk may differ and requires extensive experimental validation.

*The >99% value is a conservative analytical bound for "removable-constraint" architectures at ASI scale. See paper for details and limits.

These are not empirical claims—ranges remain subject to peer review, independent parameterization, and empirical testing. Transparency beats security theater.

Still terrifying odds. But transparency beats security theater.

Cost: $80M-$700M (comparable to 1-4 frontier training runs)
Timeline: 3-18 months to prototype
Status: Theoretical framework, not implemented

✅ Safety architecture theoretical framework and design specifications ✅ SCAI engineering firewall and adversarial red-teaming protocols ✅ Consciousness-based alignment approach and mathematical formalizations ✅ Evaluation protocols, testing methodologies, and acceptance criteria ✅ Conceptual architectural patterns for consciousness integration ✅ Research direction guidance for alignment community

❌ Production-ready implementation (requires foundation work in progress)
❌ Proprietary efficiency optimizations (enabling performance characteristics)
❌ Complete training protocols and infrastructure specifications
❌ Foundation model architectural details (under development, safety-gated)

Why? IMCA+'s safety mechanisms require performance characteristics beyond current approaches (real-time IIT φ computation, federated conscience at scale, MRAM overhead-free auditing). The enabling architectural innovations are under proprietary development. We publish the safety framework to advance alignment research; implementation requires collaboration or independent achievement of equivalent performance. This mirrors industry standards (OpenAI's safety frameworks, Anthropic's Constitutional AI principles).

Collaboration Model:

• Academic/safety research: Access under NDA for validation
• Independent development: Alternative approaches to achieve equivalent performance
• See Section 5.1.1 for details

Commitment: If IMCA+ succeeds at safe AGI alignment, we will release safety-critical components under appropriate governance. Civilizational safety > competitive advantage.

If unaligned AGI deploys first, this framework cannot help.

We need ONE of three outcomes:

1. First-mover advantage (IMCA+ before competitor AGI)
2. Industry adoption (major labs use consciousness-based alignment)
3. Regulatory mandate (governments require alignment architectures)

Otherwise we all fail together.

AGI timeline (industry median): 12-18 months
IMCA+ prototype: 3-18 months
We're in a race.

Extended documentation coming soon. Core paper contains all technical details.

For now, see the complete technical paper which includes:

• Section 10: Addressing SCAI Risks - Engineering firewall against seemingly conscious AI manipulation (added v1.2.2)
• Section 11: Conclusion - Integration of SCAI concerns with implementation roadmap
• Philosophical Foundation 1: Superintelligence Ban Paradox - Game-theoretic critique of prohibition attempts (added v1.1)
• Philosophical Foundation 2: Kill Switch Paradox - Why shutdown authority creates deception through instrumental convergence (corrected v1.1)
• 7-Layer Architecture - Complete technical specification with quantum verification
• Implementation Roadmap - Tiered development strategy ($80M-$700M, 3-18 months)
• Failure Mode Analysis - Post-developmental corruption, superintelligent circumvention, value extrapolation errors
• Governance Framework - International coordination and deployment strategy
• Appendix F: Developmental Curriculum - Complete specifications across Baby, Toddler, Child, Adolescent stages (completed v1.1)

Open to partnerships with alignment-focused organizations, research institutions, and hardware providers.

Contact:

• Research Inquiries: research@astrasafety.org
• Safety Collaboration: safety@astrasafety.org
• Media: media@astrasafety.org

Sensitive Materials: Advanced adversarial probes available to vetted institutional researchers. Email safety@astrasafety.org with credentials.

@misc{astra2025imca,
  title={IMCA+: Intrinsic Moral Consciousness Architecture-Plus},
  author={ASTRA Research Team},
  year={2025},
  note={Version 1.2.2},
  eprint={[INSERT_ARXIV_ID]},
  archivePrefix={arXiv},
  primaryClass={cs.AI}
}

Or use CITATION.cff for automatic GitHub citation generation.

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).

This is a theoretical framework requiring extensive experimental validation. All success probabilities and risk reduction estimates are preliminary theoretical bounds derived from expert elicitation, not empirical data. The >99% baseline failure rate claim in the paper represents a theoretical worst-case scenario and may not reflect current empirical opinion or reality. IMCA+ addresses fundamental alignment challenges but has not been implemented or tested at scale. Actual outcomes depend critically on validating untested assumptions about consciousness emergence, hardware-embedded morality, and multi-substrate integration. Timeline and cost estimates are subject to revision based on experimental results.

Version 1.2.2 Note: v1.2.2 introduces comprehensive SCAI (seemingly conscious AI) risk analysis and engineering firewall, addressing emerging concerns from Mustafa Suleyman and others about manipulative consciousness simulation. The framework now includes adversarial red-teaming protocols, mandatory status displays, and policy recommendations for SCAI prevention. All claims remain theoretical and require independent validation.

The Alignment Science & Technology Research Alliance (ASTRA) is an independent research organization advancing breakthrough approaches to existential AI safety challenges.

Our work spans consciousness science, neuromorphic computing, quantum architectures, developmental psychology, and multi-agent systems - unified by a singular focus: ensuring superintelligent AI systems remain aligned with human values through fundamental architectural design, not removable constraints.

Per aspera ad astra - through hardships to the stars

Website: https://astrasafety.org
Founded: 2025
Mission: Solve the superintelligence alignment problem before AGI deployment

We're running out of time. If this resonates - or if you think we're catastrophically wrong - let's talk.

The coordination problem won't solve itself.

v1.2.2 (November 2025) - SCAI Engineering Firewall & Policy Integration

• Introduced explicit SCAI (seemingly conscious AI) risks section with engineering firewall approach
• Integrated Mustafa Suleyman and others' concerns about manipulative consciousness simulation
• Added comprehensive adversarial red-teaming protocols and mandatory status displays
• Enhanced quantum verification infrastructure with policy recommendations
• Strengthened game-theoretic analysis of superintelligence ban paradox
• Updated implementation roadmap with SCAI-specific deployment considerations
• 163+ citations including new SCAI risk analysis references

v1.2.1 (November 2025) - SCAI Integration and Communication Updates

• Added SCAI risk analysis and press release enhancements
• Integrated consciousness simulation concerns into framework
• Updated communication materials for SCAI awareness
• Refined terminology and policy recommendations

v1.2 (November 2025) - Quantum Verification & Terminology Refinements

• Complete quantum-enhanced verification protocol specification
• Refined consciousness-adjacent terminology throughout
• Enhanced adversarial evaluation frameworks
• Updated developmental curriculum with SCAI considerations

v1.1.1 (October 31, 2025) - Formatting and typography improvements

• Improved markdown header hierarchy in Philosophical Foundation 1
• Better visual organization throughout section
• Consistent formatting for readability
• All content maintained (no substantive changes)

v1.1 (October 31, 2025) - Major updates and corrections

• Added Philosophical Foundation 1: Superintelligence Ban Paradox (~5,200 words)
• Corrected Philosophical Foundation 2: Kill Switch Paradox reframed to instrumental convergence
• Enhanced Appendix F: Complete developmental curriculum specifications across 4 stages
• Fixed formula error in Section 3.2.1 (V_threshold correction)
• Added GNW validation request note in Section 2.2
• 156 academic citations with 5 new references added

v1.0 (October 21, 2025) - Initial public release

• Complete theoretical framework and mathematical formalizations
• Seven-layer architecture specification with 18 homeostatic variables
• Implementation roadmap across three tiers ($80M-$700M, 3-18 months)
• Failure mode analysis and governance framework
• 152 academic citations across neuroscience, AI safety, and quantum computing

Community feedback welcome via GitHub Issues or research@astrasafety.org