Purpose
This file provides a short reusable text for audit, control review, and assurance contexts.
30-Second Explanation
LUMINA-30 gives auditors a non-binding boundary question: before irreversible impact, could humans still refuse, stop, or override the AI-driven pathway, and can that be verified by evidence? Without this question, an audit may confirm documentation or approval while missing whether refusal authority was operationally real.
Minimal Text
For audit purposes, LUMINA-30 can be used as a non-binding boundary reference to ask whether human final refusal remained operationally effective before irreversible AI impact. The review should verify whether refusal pathways, approval records, logs, and final human responsibility were sufficient to demonstrate effective refusal rather than nominal oversight.
Audit Questions
Was final human refusal available before irreversible impact?
Was it operationally effective?
Are approval and refusal records sufficient?
Can logs verify the refusal pathway?
Did AI-generated output become the sole or primary rationale?
AI
Suggested Conclusion
Effective human refusal is demonstrated only if the refusal pathway is operationally available and verifiable before irreversible impact.
Non-Affiliation Note
LUMINA-30 is provided as a public, non-binding boundary reference.
This text does not claim endorsement, adoption, affiliation, certification, compliance, legal authority, or institutional approval.
No response is required.
LUMINA-30