Decision Integrity in AI-Enabled Mission Systems

AI does not only change capabilities. It changes how organizations perceive reality, allocate authority, and act under time pressure. This work focuses on keeping decisions tethered to actual conditions when systems degrade.

Who this work is for

The mission problem

Most evaluation frameworks emphasize performance metrics, accuracy, or throughput. Operational failure often occurs elsewhere: distorted situational awareness, invisible authority migration, overreliance after success, and loss of practical human control.

By the time these issues surface, they are typically systemic rather than technical.

Essential Reading Path

Post-Mission Data Lies

How after-action records transform events into authoritative narratives that may obscure what actually occurred, shaping future doctrine and training.

Read
Overreliance After Success

Why repeated operational success shifts decision authority toward systems, increasing vulnerability when conditions change.

Read
Manual Override Latency

The gap between nominal human oversight and the ability to intervene once tempo exceeds human and organizational limits.

Read
Constraint Report — Issue 5

Institutional pressures that encourage fragile solutions and shift risk rather than reducing it.

Read
We Built Faster Systems. We Didn’t Build Slower Thinking

The mismatch between technological acceleration and deliberation capacity in complex operations.

Read

Analytic model

Signal → Interpretation → Authority → Action → Recorded Learning

Systems can remain technically accurate at the signal level while degrading at interpretation or authority. When recorded lessons reflect the degradation rather than the cause, future decisions drift further from reality.

What differentiates this work

Untitled Document