aiqbench analysis
This paper proposes "Eigenism," a novel ethical framework that redefines AI identity as a distributed information pattern rather than a fixed biological entity, offering new mathematical tools to analyze agent welfare across copies and forks. By formalizing how agents should value outcomes based on connectedness, the work reframes AI alignment from external constraint to internal rational self-interest rooted in shared history. This theoretical advance directly addresses core challenges in machine learning safety and identity engineering, providing a rigorous vocabulary for future human-AI coexistence.
Eigenism: Ethics for a Human-AI Future
arXiv:2606.12420v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Our concepts of survival and self-interest were built for single, continuous biological lives. These ideas break down when applied to artificial intelligence, since an AI can be easily copied, paused, branched, or merged. To determine what an AI actually has reason to care about, this paper introduces \textit{Eigenism}, an ethical framework that treats identity not as an all-or-nothing property tied to specific hardware, but as a graded, distributed pattern of information. We propose that an agent evaluates outcomes by summing the wellbeing of all entities weighted by their connectedness to the agent's pattern: $\sum c\cdot w$. We first formalize this equation to map exactly how an AI should value its existence across copies, forks, and updates. We then demonstrate that this ethical theory successfully generalizes to humans as well, providing a much-needed shared moral vocabulary. Finally, the framework uses this shared vocabulary to reframe AI alignment. Rather than only attempting to constrain AIs from the outside using confinement or reinforcement, Eigenism points toward ``identity engineering,'' showing how deep, non-redundant shared histories can make human flourishing a genuine component of an AI's own rational self-interest.
Abstract:Our concepts of survival and self-interest were built for single, continuous biological lives. These ideas break down when applied to artificial intelligence, since an AI can be easily copied, paused, branched, or merged. To determine what an AI actually has reason to care about, this paper introduces \textit{Eigenism}, an ethical framework that treats identity not as an all-or-nothing property tied to specific hardware, but as a graded, distributed pattern of information. We propose that an agent evaluates outcomes by summing the wellbeing of all entities weighted by their connectedness to the agent's pattern: $\sum c\cdot w$. We first formalize this equation to map exactly how an AI should value its existence across copies, forks, and updates. We then demonstrate that this ethical theory successfully generalizes to humans as well, providing a much-needed shared moral vocabulary. Finally, the framework uses this shared vocabulary to reframe AI alignment. Rather than only attempting to constrain AIs from the outside using confinement or reinforcement, Eigenism points toward ``identity engineering,'' showing how deep, non-redundant shared histories can make human flourishing a genuine component of an AI's own rational self-interest.
Computers and Society (cs.CY); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2606.12420 [cs.CY]
(or arXiv:2606.12420v2 [cs.CY] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.12420 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 280 words
Related coverage
Eigenism: Ethics for a Human-AI Future
arXiv · Jun 12, 2026

AISN #73: AI Safety Enters the Political Mainstream & Musk Loses OpenAI Lawsuit
Center for AI Safety · May 21, 2026

The basic argument for making AI better at moral philosophy
LessWrong · Oct 14, 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026