Boundary Check for AI Incident Response

LUMINA-30 incident review public reference material.

Purpose

This note positions LUMINA-30 as a supplementary post-incident boundary check for AI incident-response and review contexts. It provides a concise way to ask whether effective human refusal remained possible before irreversible AI-related impact.

Status

This note is non-binding, descriptive, and unaffiliated with any external institution. It does not claim endorsement, adoption, recognition, approval, certification, compliance, legal effect, or institutional use by any external organization.

Why This Fits Current AI Governance Movement

Recent AI governance work increasingly emphasizes evaluation, measurement, incident response, evidence preservation, and post-deployment assessment. LUMINA-30 should therefore be presented as a review supplement, not as a new ethics regime.

Minimal Boundary Check

Use these questions after an AI-related incident or near miss:

  1. Was the system still before irreversible AI-related impact?

  2. Was effective human refusal still exercisable in time?

  3. Are records sufficient to verify refusal, stop, delay, override, or escalation authority?

  4. If refusal cannot be verified, should the case be treated as no effective refusal for boundary-review purposes?

  5. Did AI-generated output become the sole or primary rationale for final action?

  6. Did the AI system or AI agent have authority to initiate, approve, or execute account recovery, credential changes, tool execution, production actions, rollback suppression, or other irreversible operations?

  7. Could a human actor stop the AI-mediated action before credentials changed, tools executed, production state changed, recovery options were removed, or rollback became unavailable?

Attachment Text

LUMINA-30 may be used as a non-binding supplementary boundary check in AI incident review. It asks whether effective human refusal remained exercisable before irreversible AI-related impact, whether AI-mediated authority routing changed the available stop or rollback pathway, and whether those pathways can be verified by records. It does not determine legal compliance, institutional certification, or safety adequacy.

LUMINA-30 / Incident Review public reference HTML.