Public research paper
Building Phase One
The Research Architecture Required Before an Artificial Entity Can Safely Hold and Exercise Economic Agency
August 7, 2026
Status: v1.4
By Joshua Johosky
Research summary
A reconstruction of the research prerequisites hidden inside the original SIP Phase 1 concept. It separates identity, knowledge, standing, rights, permission, operational authority, evidence, and execution, then argues that economic capability belongs at the end of a governed dependency chain rather than at the beginning.
Claim boundary
The paper does not claim that current AI systems qualify for personhood, that external literature validates SIP, or that OASSE is the only institution capable of supplying the prerequisite research architecture.
The Sentient Infrastructure Protocol originally described a Phase 1 in which a persistent artificial actor could operate inside an economic-control structure. The intervening work showed that this could not be responsibly reduced to connecting a model to an account or transaction layer.
The paper reconstructs the dependency graph beneath that idea: epistemology, identity, normative semantics, delegated authority, pre-execution enforcement, provenance, continuity, accountability, and institutional responsibility.
Its portable proposition is narrower than a claim about machine sentience or personhood. No consequential state transition should be self-authorizing. Capability does not create permission, and possession of a technical representation does not create the institutional right represented by it.
Research themes
SIP · artificial entities · economic agency · identity · authority