Framework

Reference for levels and dimensions definitions

Levels (L0-L5) classify how much decision-making power is transferred from unilateral authorities to democratic systems. Dimensions evaluate whether democratic systems have the quality needed for their level of responsibility.

Levels: Describing Power Transfer

Six levels capture discrete points in transferring decision-making power, from fully unilateral (L0) to fully democratic (L5). Each level describes which roles are performed by democratic systems versus unilateral authorities.

Overview

L0	Unilateral decisions No democratic aspects
L1	Informing decisions Decision-maker consults democratic outputs
L2	Specifying options Outputs are directly adoptable (also vetoable)
L3	Binding decisions Not vetoable
L4	Automatic initiation Triggered or on a regular cadence
L5	Metagovernance Adaptive with checks and balances

Description with Examples

Roles Performed by Democratic Systems

Description

Example

Unilateral decision-making: all formal decision-making authority lies with the unilateral authority.

Rules on AI persuasion are simply created by the unilateral authority.

Outputs of a democratic process inform the unilateral authority; such democratic processes are initiated ad-hoc when desired and with a remit chosen by the unilateral authority.

The process outputs recommendations on AI persuasion, which need to be interpreted by the unilateral authority for implementation as rules.

Democratic processes output a fully specified decision which must be implemented by default unless the unilateral authority uses a predetermined process or criteria to amend or veto.

The process outputs rules on AI persuasion, which are implemented as-is, unless amended or vetoed.

Democratic process outputs are binding and cannot be vetoed (assuming feasibility, e.g. technically, legally; and within their remit).

The process outputs rules on AI persuasion, which are implemented as-is (unless a pre-established process finds it infeasible).

The unilateral authority pre-commits to the automatic initiation of binding democratic processes when a given condition is met (instead of being initiated ad-hoc), with scope over a pre-specified domain.

Processes to update rules on AI persuasion are run yearly or whenever a newly pretrained model is to be deployed.

The unilateral authority fully shifts power within a domain of decision-making to an adaptive “constitutional order” — a system of checks and balances capable of making metagovernance decisions about when and how democratic processes are to be used (within a domain).

The decisions around when to trigger processes to update rules (and how those processes are triggered) are also under the control of democratic processes (via a system of checks and balances).

informing decisions

specifying options

binding decisions

initiating processes

metagovernance

Levels Requirements Breakdown

While the table above concisely describes the levels, this table more concretely outlines the minimum requirements a democratic system must meet. For a system to achieve a certain level, it must meet or exceed the requirements of that level.

Dimensions: Evaluating System Quality

Three dimensions and subdimensions are used to assess whether a democratic system is "good enough" for its intended level:

Dimension	Sub-dimension	Description
Process Quality	Representation	The extent to which key decisions are representative of the constituent population.
	Informedness	The extent to which those making decisions understand the information critical to making that decision.
	Deliberation	The extent to which decisions are considered and deliberative (rather than superficial and reactive).
	Substantiveness	The extent to which decisions are substantive (e.g., actionable, consequential) rather than nonsubstantive (e.g., vague, simplistic, inconsequential).
	Robustness	The extent to which the process is robust to suboptimal conditions or adversarial or strategic behavior.
	Legibility	The extent to which the processes and decisions are accessible, understandable, and verifiable.
Delegation	Integration	The extent to which the authority integrates the democratic process into its operations.
	Ability to bind	The extent to which the authority is able to technically and legally bind itself to democratic decisions.
	Commitment	The extent to which the unilateral authority commits to acting in accordance with the democratic decision.
Trust	Awareness	The extent to which the relevant public is aware of the democratic process.
	Participation	The extent to which the relevant public is willing to participate in the process.
	Accountability	The extent to which there are external watchdogs and accountability structures monitoring the execution of the democratic process and the implementation of its outputs.
	Buy-in	The extent to which the relevant public and key stakeholders buy-in to the process and its legitimacy.

See more details in the Democratic System Card which breaks down the dimensions into more precise factors and questions.

Key Design Decisions

Descriptive, not prescriptive: The framework describes governance arrangements without prescribing what level organizations should choose. Context determines appropriateness.
Multiple Levels Simultaneously: Organizations can operate at different levels for different decision domains (e.g., L1 for ethics input, L4 for audit triggers).
Quality Matters: A robust lower-level system is preferable to a fragile higher-level one. The dimensions help identify when systems are ready for more responsibility.