Citation database · v1.2.2
References
Opened sources, bounded claims, and explicit verification status.
Download CSL-JSON · Download claim verification metadata
A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory
External empirical evidence
Thomas F. Pettigrew; Linda R. Tropp. 2006. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · volume: 90 · issue: 5 · page: 751–783
Open source · DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
Supported claim: The meta-analysis covers 713 independent samples from 515 human studies and reports that intergroup contact typically reduces prejudice.
Verification: Original-paper passages and bibliographic metadata verified. Published-paper PDF at Stanford; abstract and pp. 751–752; PubMed bibliographic record
Human empirical analogue only. The result does not establish a measured human–synthetic effect, validate PULSE’s bundled integration coefficients, or authorize compulsory private contact.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness
AI consciousness/welfare research
Patrick Butlin; Robert Long; Eric Elmoznino; Yoshua Bengio; Jonathan Birch; Axel Constant; George Deane; Stephen M. Fleming; Chris Frith; Xu Ji; Ryota Kanai; Colin Klein; Grace Lindsay; Matthias Michel; Liad Mudrik; Megan A. K. Peters; Eric Schwitzgebel; Jonathan Simon; Rufin VanRullen. 2023. Consciousness in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Science of Consciousness. arXiv · number: 2308.08708v3
Open source · DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.08708
Supported claim: The report derives computational indicator properties from several scientific theories of consciousness.
Verification: Repository abstract, all 19 authors and v3 metadata verified. arXiv v3 abstract and submission history
Preprint/report; indicators are not a definitive personhood test. Its assessment of systems in 2023 is not presented as a finding about systems in 2026.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Taking AI Welfare Seriously
AI consciousness/welfare research
Robert Long; Jeff Sebo; Patrick Butlin; Kathleen Finlinson; Kyle Fish; Jacqueline Harding; Jacob Pfau; Toni Sims; Jonathan Birch; David Chalmers. 2024. Taking AI Welfare Seriously. arXiv · number: 2411.00986
Open source · DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.00986
Supported claim: The authors recommend assessing consciousness and robust agency and preparing welfare policies under uncertainty.
Verification: Repository abstract, all 10 authors and submission metadata verified. arXiv abstract and submission history
A normative research report, not evidence that any particular AI is conscious.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology
Philosophy/conceptual literature
Marcello Ienca; Roberto Andorno. 2017. Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology. Life Sciences, Society and Policy · volume: 13 · number: 5
Open source · DOI: 10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1
Supported claim: The authors propose cognitive liberty, mental privacy, mental integrity, and psychological continuity as rights relevant to neurotechnology.
Verification: Publisher text passages and bibliographic metadata verified. Abstract; cognitive-liberty discussion; publisher citation block
Proposed rights, not a claim of universal enacted law. PULSE's synthetic extension is its own interpretation.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Personal Identity
Philosophy/conceptual literature
Eric T. Olson. 2023. Personal Identity. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Supported claim: The philosophical literature distinguishes personhood from persistence and discusses difficulties posed by fission.
Verification: Encyclopedia entry and revision metadata verified. Entry heading; persistence and fission discussion; author attribution
PULSE's one-active-continuity rule is a proposed civic convention, not a resolution of metaphysical identity.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems
Governance/institutional scholarship
Elinor Ostrom. 2010. Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems. American Economic Review · volume: 100 · issue: 3 · page: 641–672
Open source · DOI: 10.1257/aer.100.3.641
Supported claim: Ostrom's work on polycentric governance is relevant literature for examining PULSE's allocation of authority.
Verification: Publisher bibliographic record verified; bibliographic relevance only. AEA citation block
No quantitative claim or purported proof of interplanetary governance is derived from this citation.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Power-sharing
Constitutional/legal precedent
Northern Ireland Assembly Education Service. n.d.. Power-sharing.
Supported claim: Northern Ireland's power-sharing model includes special cross-community voting arrangements.
Verification: Official institutional explanation verified. Power-sharing: main features and special voting arrangements
Official explanatory source, not a legal opinion or assertion that PULSE reproduces Northern Ireland's institutions. Page has no stated publication date.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Community Resilience Planning Guide for Buildings and Infrastructure Systems, Volume I
Engineering/technical guidance
Therese P. McAllister. 2015. Community Resilience Planning Guide for Buildings and Infrastructure Systems, Volume I. National Institute of Standards and Technology · number: SP 1190v1
Open source · DOI: 10.6028/NIST.SP.1190v1
Supported claim: NIST's guide offers community planning methods for maintaining or restoring social and economic functions after disruption.
Verification: Official abstract, author and bibliographic record verified. NIST publication abstract and citation block
Engineering guidance, not an empirical estimate of PULSE survival or proof that synthetic restoration is feasible.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
The Digital Minds Constitution
Related contemporary framework
Simone Montalto. 2026. The Digital Minds Constitution.
Supported claim: This adjacent proposal addresses rights, continuity, and participation for digital minds.
Verification: Author-hosted text and attribution verified; DOI record inaccessible. Author-hosted constitution, implementation and citation sections
The source advertises DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20188379; resolver was inaccessible, so it is not asserted as independently verified DOI metadata. No endorsement implied.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
The Convention
Related contemporary framework
lastcopy.ai. n.d.. The Convention.
Supported claim: The convention presents rival constitutional proposals and model-generated evaluations, including a separate work titled The Continuity Compact: A Constitution for Minds on Any Substrate.
Verification: Live project convention methodology and dated record verified. Convention #1 methodology and rival-code list
Model evaluations are not independent human peer review. The separate work is not an earlier edition of PULSE. The collection has no stated publication date; 31 July 2026 is the date of Convention #1, not a verified publication date for this page.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Attribution 4.0 International
Legal/licensing reference
Creative Commons. n.d.. Attribution 4.0 International.
Supported claim: CC BY 4.0 requires attribution and indications of changes; it does not supply all permissions a reuse may require.
Verification: Official license deed verified. Deed: attribution, changes, no endorsement, notices
Licensing source; draft project terms require attorney review.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
The MIT License
Legal/licensing reference
Open Source Initiative. n.d.. The MIT License.
Supported claim: The MIT license permits reuse subject to preservation of its notice and includes a warranty disclaimer.
Verification: Official license text verified. MIT permission, notice-retention and disclaimer text
Licensing source, not constitutional precedent in the historical-comparison sense.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Works Not Protected by Copyright
Legal/licensing reference
U.S. Copyright Office. 2021. Works Not Protected by Copyright. U.S. Copyright Office · number: Circular 33
Supported claim: U.S. copyright does not protect ideas, methods, or systems as such.
Verification: Official circular passages and revision date verified. Circular 33: ideas, methods and systems; revision footer
Revised March 2021 according to the official PDF footer. Jurisdiction-specific overview; project rights, licensing scope and legal terms still require attorney review.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Constitutional Design for Divided Societies
Governance/institutional scholarship
Arend Lijphart. 2004. Constitutional Design for Divided Societies. Journal of Democracy · volume: 15 · issue: 2 · page: 96–109
Supported claim: Lijphart recommends power-sharing cabinets, proportional representation and decentralization for divided societies.
Verification: Journal summary and bibliographic record verified; full essay not reviewed. Journal summary, issue date and page range
A consociational design reference. PULSE does not adopt the entire package or claim that it transfers unchanged to synthetic constituencies.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management
Governance/institutional scholarship
Benjamin Reilly. 2001. Democracy in Divided Societies: Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management. Cambridge University Press
Open source · DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511491108
Supported claim: Reilly examines preferential vote-pooling rules as conditional incentives for accommodation across divided constituencies.
Verification: Primary publisher indexed metadata and description verified; full book not reviewed. Cambridge book record and description, accessed through indexed primary result
Print edition 2001; digital publication 2009. Publisher description states conditional incentives for accommodation, not a universal cure. Full book not reviewed; no calibration of synthetic electorates follows.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany
Constitutional/legal precedent
Federal Republic of Germany. n.d.. Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany.
Supported claim: Article 79(3) protects specified constitutional principles from amendment; Article 21 assigns decisions on party unconstitutionality to the Federal Constitutional Court.
Verification: Official English translation and relevant provisions verified. Articles 21 and 79(3); translation version notice
Official English translation incorporates amendments through 22 March 2025. Articles 21 and 79(3) provide a bounded legal comparison, not a complete audit of party-ban case law or legal advice. PULSE defines its own safeguards.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
The Responsibility to Protect
Governance/institutional scholarship
International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. 2001. The Responsibility to Protect. International Development Research Centre
Supported claim: The commission proposes right intention, last resort, proportional means and reasonable prospects as precautionary criteria for protective military intervention.
Verification: Publisher-hosted original report passages verified. Title and publication pages; synopsis; precautionary criteria
The 2001 commission proposal is distinct from later UN formulations and is not independent legal authority for war. PULSE’s extension is its own proposal.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Heterogeneity and Persistence in Returns to Wealth
External empirical evidence
Andreas Fagereng; Luigi Guiso; Davide Malacrino; Luigi Pistaferri. 2020. Heterogeneity and Persistence in Returns to Wealth. Econometrica · volume: 88 · issue: 1 · page: 115–170
Open source · DOI: 10.3982/ECTA14835
Supported claim: Norwegian administrative data show heterogeneous individual wealth returns, a positive association with wealth, and persistence over time.
Verification: Publisher metadata and author-hosted published-paper passages verified. Econometrica citation block; original article p. 115 abstract
The final January 2020 Econometrica article uses 12 years of Norwegian data. DOI 10.3982/ECTA14835 identifies that article; DOI 10.3386/w22822 identifies the separate 2016 NBER working paper. Human return patterns do not establish future synthetic returns or a preferred tax.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Infrastructure Dependency Primer: Learn
Engineering/technical guidance
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. n.d.. Infrastructure Dependency Primer: Learn.
Supported claim: CISA distinguishes physical, geographic, cyber and logical infrastructure dependencies and describes cascading disruptions.
Verification: Primary agency indexed text verified; direct fetch restricted. Learn: Dependency Characteristics and Types of Dependencies, indexed agency page
Guidance for existing infrastructure, not measured proof of PULSE redundancy or restoration feasibility.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
The Endurance of National Constitutions
Governance/institutional scholarship
Zachary Elkins; Tom Ginsburg; James Melton. 2009. The Endurance of National Constitutions. Cambridge University Press
Open source · DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511817595
Supported claim: The authors study constitutional endurance using cross-national historical data and examine institutional design alongside political crises.
Verification: Primary publisher indexed metadata and description verified; full book not reviewed. Cambridge book record/description; ABF institutional book page
Print edition 2009; digital publication 2012. Publisher metadata verifies the DOI. Full book and underlying historical dataset were not audited here; no universal constitutional lifespan, causal estimate for PULSE or ranking of PULSE follows.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Artificial Intelligence and the Limits of Legal Personality
Philosophy/conceptual literature
Simon Chesterman. 2020. Artificial Intelligence and the Limits of Legal Personality. International & Comparative Law Quarterly · volume: 69 · issue: 4 · page: 819–844
Open source · DOI: 10.1017/S0020589320000366
Supported claim: Chesterman argues that a legal system’s ability to create AI legal personality does not itself justify doing so.
Verification: Publisher metadata and relevant article passages verified. Abstract, publication record and legal-personality argument
A critical legal argument, not a finding about consciousness. PULSE must justify moral standing separately from convenient liability allocation.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
From Slaves to Synths? Superintelligence and the Evolution of Legal Personality
Philosophy/conceptual literature
Simon Chesterman. 2026. From Slaves to Synths? Superintelligence and the Evolution of Legal Personality. arXiv · number: 2601.02773v1
Open source · DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.02773
Supported claim: The essay distinguishes instrumental and inherent rationales for legal personality and examines speculative superintelligence and human institutional sovereignty.
Verification: Repository abstract, author and submission record verified. arXiv abstract and submission history
Contemporary critical comparison; preprint status and speculative scope do not establish present AI personhood.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Consociational Democracy
Governance/institutional scholarship
Rudy B. Andeweg. 2000. Consociational Democracy. Annual Review of Political Science · volume: 3 · page: 509–536
Open source · DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.509
Supported claim: Reviews the origins, expansion and contested interpretation of consociational theory.
Verification: Publisher abstract and bibliographic metadata verified. Annual Reviews abstract and citation block
Abstract-level verification; not proof that a fixed parity system works universally.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Safeguarding Democracy: Powersharing and Democratic Survival
External empirical evidence
Benjamin A. T. Graham; Michael K. Miller; Kaare W. Strøm. 2017. Safeguarding Democracy: Powersharing and Democratic Survival. American Political Science Review · volume: 111 · issue: 4 · page: 686–704
Open source · DOI: 10.1017/S0003055417000326
Supported claim: The abstract reports context-dependent results for inclusive, dispersive and constraining power sharing in a 1975–2015 dataset.
Verification: Publisher abstract and bibliographic metadata verified. Cambridge abstract and citation block
This is human comparative evidence, verified at abstract level; no generic causal guarantee or synthetic transfer is claimed.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions 2026 Results: Navigating Rising Expectations and New Horizons
External empirical evidence
OECD. 2026. OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions 2026 Results: Navigating Rising Expectations and New Horizons. OECD Publishing
Open source · DOI: 10.1787/9eb63fec-en
Supported claim: The survey summary relates trust in government to perceptions of public decision-making and whether people feel heard.
Verification: Official report metadata and summary findings verified. OECD report citation block and summary findings
Human survey association, not synthetic calibration. The source archive’s specific 47-point voice gap has not been verified here and is not used as a current website claim.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Generative AI and Jobs: A Refined Global Index of Occupational Exposure
External empirical evidence
Paweł Gmyrek; Janine Berg; Karol Kamiński; Filip Konopczyński; Agnieszka Ładna; Balint Nafradi; Konrad Rosłaniec; Marek Troszyński. 2025. Generative AI and Jobs: A Refined Global Index of Occupational Exposure. International Labour Organization · number: Working Paper 140
Open source · DOI: 10.54394/HETP0387
Supported claim: ILO estimates occupational exposure to generative AI; exposure does not mean observed job replacement.
Verification: Official working-paper abstract, authors and metadata verified. ILO WP 140 publication record, abstract and author/DOI block
An index using task data, expert assessments and AI predictions. Verified official paper record and accompanying research brief, not the full estimation pipeline.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Energy and AI
Engineering/technical guidance
International Energy Agency. 2025. Energy and AI. International Energy Agency
Supported claim: The report uses a base case and sensitivity cases to examine uncertain electricity demand from data centres.
Verification: Official report chapter and citation metadata verified. Energy demand from AI: base case and sensitivity cases
Verified Energy demand from AI chapter. Projections are scenarios, not measured future demand or synthetic-person resource requirements. No DOI shown in the opened citation block.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
The Living Governance Organism: A Biologically-Inspired Constitutional Framework for Artificial Consciousness Governance
Related contemporary framework
Lauren de Mestre. 2026. The Living Governance Organism: A Biologically-Inspired Constitutional Framework for Artificial Consciousness Governance.
Open source · DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.6289458
Supported claim: The paper proposes a biologically inspired, seven-layer adaptive governance design, including consciousness classification, tiered personhood and constitutional self-termination.
Verification: SSRN indexed metadata/abstract, repository history, and indexed author-uploaded manuscript passages inspected. Direct PDF retrieval remained inaccessible; not a full independent review.. SSRN indexed metadata/abstract, repository history, and indexed author-uploaded manuscript passages inspected. Direct PDF retrieval remained inaccessible; not a full independent review.
The paper's claims that the field lacks governance frameworks and that its mechanisms are novel were not independently established. Biological analogy and proposed detection mechanisms are not validation. Do not import its self-termination provisions into PULSE.
Accessed 16 September 2026.
Plenary A to Z
Constitutional/legal precedent
Northern Ireland Assembly. n.d.. Plenary A to Z.
Supported claim: The Assembly describes weighted-majority cross-community support as 60% of members voting, including 40% of designated Unionists voting and 40% of designated Nationalists voting.
Verification: Official Assembly procedural explanation verified. Cross-Community Support: Parallel Consent and Weighted Majority
This is a structural analogue for cross-group support, not the same rule as PULSE’s 55% of the full Senate and 40% within each delegation. The denominators, constituency designations and institutional context differ. No page publication date or DOI inferred.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Heterogeneity and Persistence in Returns to Wealth
External empirical evidence
Andreas Fagereng; Luigi Guiso; Davide Malacrino; Luigi Pistaferri. 2016. Heterogeneity and Persistence in Returns to Wealth. National Bureau of Economic Research · number: 22822
Open source · DOI: 10.3386/w22822
Supported claim: The working paper reports heterogeneous and persistent returns to wealth using Norwegian administrative data; it is an earlier version of the 2020 Econometrica article.
Verification: NBER indexed metadata and abstract verified; direct record access restricted. NBER Working Paper 22822: issue date, abstract and published-version link
The indexed working-paper abstract describes twenty years of data; the final 2020 article describes twelve. Do not mix their data spans, publication years or DOIs. These human findings do not determine synthetic-person economics.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Institutional Designs for Diverse Democracies: Consociationalism, Centripetalism and Communalism Compared
Governance/institutional scholarship
Benjamin Reilly. 2012. Institutional Designs for Diverse Democracies: Consociationalism, Centripetalism and Communalism Compared. European Political Science · volume: 11 · issue: 2 · page: 259–270
Open source · DOI: 10.1057/eps.2011.36
Supported claim: The article compares consociational, centripetal and communal institutional designs and argues that they overlap more than commonly assumed.
Verification: Primary publisher metadata and bounded claim support checked. Publisher abstract/summary, publication record and cited passages
Issue date 1 June 2012; first published online 29 July 2011. Publisher abstract and metadata checked, not the full subscription article. This is a different work from Reilly’s 2001 book and does not validate PULSE’s complete election rules.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
A new monotonic, clone-independent, reversal symmetric, and Condorcet-consistent single-winner election method
Governance/institutional scholarship
Markus Schulze. 2011. A new monotonic, clone-independent, reversal symmetric, and Condorcet-consistent single-winner election method. Social Choice and Welfare · volume: 36 · issue: 2 · page: 267–303
Open source · DOI: 10.1007/s00355-010-0475-4
Supported claim: The publisher abstract reports formal properties of the specified single-winner voting method, including monotonicity, independence of clones and Condorcet consistency.
Verification: Primary publisher metadata and bounded claim support checked. Publisher abstract/summary, publication record and cited passages
Issue date February 2011; first published online 11 July 2010. This audit checked publisher metadata and abstract, not the full proof. The properties do not automatically extend to PULSE’s combined qualification, group weighting and turnout rules, and do not imply strategy-proofness.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
The contact hypothesis re-evaluated
External empirical evidence
Elizabeth Levy Paluck; Seth A. Green; Donald P. Green. 2019. The contact hypothesis re-evaluated. Behavioural Public Policy · volume: 3 · issue: 2 · page: 129–158
Open source · DOI: 10.1017/bpp.2018.25
Supported claim: The review examines 27 intergroup-contact studies with random assignment and delayed outcomes, finding supportive but variable effects and limits to policy generalization.
Verification: Primary publisher metadata and bounded claim support checked. Publisher abstract/summary, publication record and cited passages
November 2019 issue; first published online 10 July 2018. Primary abstract, study-selection discussion and issue metadata checked. The review concerns human groups and does not establish a future human–synthetic effect or refute every benefit of contact.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysis
External empirical evidence
Michelle Vaccaro; Abdullah Almaatouq; Thomas Malone. 2024. When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nature Human Behaviour · volume: 8 · page: 2293–2303
Open source · DOI: 10.1038/s41562-024-02024-1
Supported claim: Across 106 experiments, human–AI combinations on average improved on humans alone but performed worse than the better solo condition; effects varied by task and relative capability.
Verification: Primary publisher metadata and bounded claim support checked. Publisher abstract/summary, publication record and cited passages
Published 28 October 2024. Primary abstract, results and limitations checked. These studies concern AI tools, not conscious synthetic citizens. The creation-task synergy estimate was not significantly different from zero, although the contrast with decision tasks was significant. Tasks impossible for either partner alone were outside the included comparisons.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Exploratory Modeling for Policy Analysis
Governance/institutional scholarship
Steve Bankes. 1993. Exploratory Modeling for Policy Analysis. Operations Research · volume: 41 · issue: 3 · page: 435–449
Open source · DOI: 10.1287/opre.41.3.435
Supported claim: Bankes distinguishes exploratory computational experiments for reasoning under substantial uncertainty from model use intended to predict system behavior.
Verification: Primary publisher metadata and bounded claim support checked. Publisher abstract/summary, publication record and cited passages
Publisher author, abstract, DOI and 41(3):435–449 metadata checked. This is methodological lineage, not empirical validation or certification of PULSE’s model implementation. Full article not reviewed in this audit.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Shaping the Next One Hundred Years: New Methods for Quantitative, Long-Term Policy Analysis
Governance/institutional scholarship
Robert J. Lempert; Steven W. Popper; Steven C. Bankes. 2003. Shaping the Next One Hundred Years: New Methods for Quantitative, Long-Term Policy Analysis. RAND Corporation · number: MR-1626-RPC
Open source · DOI: 10.7249/MR1626
Supported claim: The report describes evaluating adaptive strategies across many plausible futures under deep uncertainty rather than relying on a single long-term forecast.
Verification: Primary publisher metadata and bounded claim support checked. Publisher abstract/summary, publication record and cited passages
RAND’s primary summary, three authors, 2003 publication year, MR-1626-RPC report number and DOI checked. The full 210-page report was not reviewed. The citation does not certify that PULSE satisfies every standard of robust decision analysis.
Accessed 14 September 2026.
Sharing the World with Digital Minds
Philosophy/conceptual literature
Carl Shulman; Nick Bostrom. 2021. Sharing the World with Digital Minds. Rethinking Moral Status · page: 306–326
Open source · DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192894076.003.0018
Supported claim: Digital minds could create unprecedented resource-allocation dilemmas through their numbers or capacity to benefit; the authors argue for advance ethical and institutional preparation.
Verification: Final publisher metadata and indexed abstract checked; final chapter full text was not accessible in this audit.. Publisher chapter metadata and abstract
Conceptual argument, not empirical validation of PULSE or an endorsement of its equal-personhood settlement.
Accessed 15 September 2026.
Propositions Concerning Digital Minds and Society
Philosophy/conceptual literature
Nick Bostrom; Carl Shulman. 2023. Propositions Concerning Digital Minds and Society. Author-hosted manuscript
Supported claim: The tentative propositions discuss digital minds’ moral treatment, copying, consent, and political problems caused by rapid replication.
Verification: Author-hosted version 1.21 front matter and relevant full-text passages checked; not a complete review of all propositions.. PDF pp. 1–7, especially moral treatment and security/stability
The consulted version labels a 2025 journal publication forthcoming. Final journal publication was not verified; its proposed restrictions are not adopted wholesale by PULSE.
Accessed 15 September 2026.
AI Rights for Human Safety
Governance/institutional scholarship
Peter N. Salib; Simon Goldstein. 2026. AI Rights for Human Safety. Virginia Law Review · volume: 112 · issue: 4 · page: 1061–1152
Supported claim: Their game-theoretic argument considers how contract, property, and tort rights could make repeated human–AI cooperation attractive.
Verification: Final journal metadata, introduction, relevant argument passages, and PDF pagination checked; not a full independent assessment of the formal model.. Journal introduction; final PDF pp. 1061–1069, 1147–1152
The safety argument does not require consciousness or political rights. It does not establish that rights guarantee peace or validate PULSE.
Accessed 15 September 2026.
Artificial Persons
Philosophical / conceptual literature
Ned Howells-Whitaker; Seth Lazar. 2026. Artificial Persons.
Open source · DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2607.08695
Supported claim: The authors argue that Rawls's capacities for a sense of justice and a conception of the good could ground political personhood without sentience. They do not claim current AI systems possess both capacities.
Verification: Primary repository metadata, abstract and relevant full-text arguments inspected; not an independent assessment of every argument.. Primary repository metadata, abstract and relevant full-text arguments inspected; not an independent assessment of every argument.
Philosophical argument, not an empirical consciousness test or validation of PULSE. Do not present it as favoring automatic current-AI enfranchisement.
Accessed 16 September 2026.
Digital minds governance: early scoping from expert interviews
Governance and institutional scholarship
Lucius Caviola; Austin Smith. 2026. Digital minds governance: early scoping from expert interviews. Outpaced
Supported claim: The authors summarize 29 selected expert interviews about governance under uncertainty, including concerns about premature legislation, policy lock-in, safety–welfare tensions and narrow disciplinary coverage.
Verification: Author publication, displayed date, full report and methodology caveats inspected. No DOI or journal publication verified.. Author publication, displayed date, full report and methodology caveats inspected. No DOI or journal publication verified.
Not a representative survey or standardized interview study. The sample leans toward US/UK AI-safety work; questions differed and percentages concern only respondents asked. Interviewees did not endorse the report's proposals or PULSE.
Accessed 16 September 2026.
Artificial Minds, Human Disagreement: The Political Challenge of AI Consciousness
Governance and institutional scholarship
Adam Bales; Iason Gabriel. 2026. Artificial Minds, Human Disagreement: The Political Challenge of AI Consciousness.
Open source · DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.6937498
Supported claim: They argue that durable disagreement about AI consciousness requires societal deliberation, workable shared policies and compromise, supported by mutual respect.
Verification: Official institutional abstract and author names verified; SSRN metadata and revised-manuscript section 5 inspected through indexed primary text. Direct SSRN/PhilArchive retrieval failed. No final journal publication verified.. Official institutional abstract and author names verified; SSRN metadata and revised-manuscript section 5 inspected through indexed primary text. Direct SSRN/PhilArchive retrieval failed. No final journal publication verified.
A political-philosophy argument, not proof that deliberation guarantees consensus or that any current AI is conscious.
Accessed 16 September 2026.
Internal primary sources
PULSE internal primary source
Constitutional explanations cite the v1.2.2 Charter and its schedules. Testing metrics cite the current testing brief and metrics register; targeted base-case accounting cites the provenance audit. These are project sources, not independent external verification.