PAT-0240
Authority-State Mismatch
A structural condition where observed system state no longer aligns with the declared authority state that is supposed to govern it.
Primary Lenses
Reconciliation Lens
Evaluates whether structural changes align with declared authority updates, version changes, or reconciliation rules.
Lens Application
The Reconciliation Lens is a primary inspection mechanism for Authority-State Mismatch because it examines whether observed state changes align with the authority records, version transitions, or reconciliation rules that claim to govern them. It helps surface where declared authority and operational state appear to diverge.
Inspect For
- State changes without matching authority updates
- Version records that do not match observed behavior
- Reconciliation rules skipped, delayed, or inconsistently applied
- Conflicting authority sources governing the same state
Avoid
Treat mismatches as inspection signals requiring traceability review, not proof that Authority-State Mismatch has occurred.
Secondary Lenses
Convergence Lens
Compares parallel structural systems to determine whether they align under shared authority.
Lens Application
The Convergence Lens applies indirectly to Authority-State Mismatch by showing whether systems under the same declared authority framework are converging, diverging, or maintaining inconsistent observed states. Divergence may suggest areas where declared authority is not being consistently reflected in practice.
Inspect For
- Parallel units governed by the same authority but showing different states
- Repeated divergence after common directives or controls
- Local adaptations that conflict with declared authority state
- Alignment in documentation but mismatch in observed operation
Avoid
Treat convergence gaps as inspection signals, not evidence that Authority-State Mismatch has been established.
Reference Stability Lens
Evaluates whether structural references, identifiers, nodes, and edges remain consistent across execution cycles or comparable states.
Lens Application
The Reference Stability Lens applies indirectly to Authority-State Mismatch by highlighting reference drift, identifier inconsistency, or unstable structural links between authority declarations and observed state. It can help surface where mismatch becomes visible across cycles without serving as the primary diagnostic mechanism.
Inspect For
- References that point to outdated authority states
- Identifiers that change across comparable executions
- Nodes or edges that no longer match declared governance structure
- Repeated state observations tied to inconsistent references
Avoid
Treat reference instability as a signal for further inspection, not sufficient evidence that Authority-State Mismatch is present.
Primary Issue Matches
Behavior Does Not Match Declared Role
The AI or agent behaves outside, below, or differently from the role, authority, responsibility, or permission posture declared for it.
Cannot Identify Authoritative State
The user or workflow cannot tell which state, version, review result, decision, source, or output is currently authoritative.
Declared Owner Cannot Control Outcome
A person, role, system, or policy is declared responsible for an outcome but does not have the actual authority or control needed to govern it.
Model and Workflow Disagree on Next Step
The AI model recommends or selects a next step that conflicts with the workflow state, required handoff, routing rule, or process sequence.
Revoked Approval Still Treated as Active
An approval, permission, exception, or authorization that was revoked continues to affect AI behavior or workflow decisions as if it were still active.
Supporting Issue Matches
Actual Policy Differs From Declared Policy
The policy the AI or workflow actually follows differs from the policy that is documented, declared, displayed, or expected.
Early Model Output Gets Overweighted Downstream
An early AI output receives too much authority in later workflow steps, decisions, reviews, or generated artifacts.
Human Review and Automation Disagree
A human review result and an automated AI or workflow result disagree without a declared rule for resolving the difference.
Local Exception Grows Into Policy
A local exception, special case, or one-off allowance begins to function like a general policy.
No Owner for Agent Action
An agent action can affect the system without a declared responsible owner, authority, or accountable decision path.
Routing Overrides Task Intent
Routing, mode selection, agent behavior, or workflow classification sends the task down a path that overrides what the user was trying to accomplish.
Rubric Changed but Results Did Not
A review rubric, scoring rule, evaluation standard, or classification criterion changes, but AI results continue to reflect the old rubric.
Similar Cases Route to Different Outcomes
Similar inputs, cases, prompts, or workflow states are routed to different outcomes without a declared difference that explains the split.