Toward Adaptive Categories: Dimensional Governance for Agentic AI

As AI systems evolve from static tools to dynamic agents, traditional categorical governance frameworks -- based on fixed risk tiers, levels of autonomy, or human oversight models -- are increasingly insufficient on their own. Systems built on foundation models, self-supervised learning, and multi-agent architectures increasingly blur the boundaries that categories were designed to police. In this Perspective, we make the case for dimensional governance: a framework that tracks how decision authority, process autonomy, and accountability (the 3As) distribute dynamically across human-AI relationships. A critical advantage of this approach is its ability to explicitly monitor system movement toward and across key governance thresholds, enabling preemptive adjustments before risks materialize. This dimensional approach provides the necessary foundation for more adaptive categorization, enabling thresholds and classifications that can evolve with emerging capabilities. While categories remain essential for decision-making, building them upon dimensional foundations allows for context-specific adaptability and stakeholder-responsive governance that static approaches cannot achieve. We outline key dimensions, critical trust thresholds, and practical examples illustrating where rigid categorical frameworks fail -- and where a dimensional mindset could offer a more resilient and future-proof path forward for both governance and innovation at the frontier of artificial intelligence.

Human-AI Governance (HAIG): A Trust-Utility Approach

This paper introduces the HAIG framework for analysing trust dynamics across evolving human-AI relationships. Current categorical frameworks (e.g., "human-in-the-loop" models) inadequately capture how AI systems evolve from tools to partners, particularly as foundation models demonstrate emergent capabilities and multi-agent systems exhibit autonomous goal-setting behaviours. As systems advance, agency redistributes in complex patterns that are better represented as positions along continua rather than discrete categories, though progression may include both gradual shifts and significant step changes. The HAIG framework operates across three levels: dimensions (Decision Authority Distribution, Process Autonomy, and Accountability Configuration), continua (gradual shifts along each dimension), and thresholds (critical points requiring governance adaptation). Unlike risk-based or principle-based approaches, HAIG adopts a trust-utility orientation, focusing on maintaining appropriate trust relationships that maximise utility while ensuring sufficient safeguards. Our analysis reveals how technical advances in self-supervision, reasoning authority, and distributed decision-making drive non-uniform trust evolution across both contextual variation and technological advancement. Case studies in healthcare and European regulation demonstrate how HAIG complements existing frameworks while offering a foundation for alternative approaches that anticipate governance challenges before they emerge.

The Algorithmic State Architecture (ASA): An Integrated Framework for AI-Enabled Government

As artificial intelligence transforms public sector operations, governments struggle to integrate technological innovations into coherent systems for effective service delivery. This paper introduces the Algorithmic State Architecture (ASA), a novel four-layer framework conceptualising how Digital Public Infrastructure, Data-for-Policy, Algorithmic Government/Governance, and GovTech interact as an integrated system in AI-enabled states. Unlike approaches that treat these as parallel developments, ASA positions them as interdependent layers with specific enabling relationships and feedback mechanisms. Through comparative analysis of implementations in Estonia, Singapore, India, and the UK, we demonstrate how foundational digital infrastructure enables systematic data collection, which powers algorithmic decision-making processes, ultimately manifesting in user-facing services. Our analysis reveals that successful implementations require balanced development across all layers, with particular attention to integration mechanisms between them. The framework contributes to both theory and practice by bridging previously disconnected domains of digital government research, identifying critical dependencies that influence implementation success, and providing a structured approach for analysing the maturity and development pathways of AI-enabled government systems.