HAGA™ Architecture Summary

Parent Standards: 12 Core Modules: 60 Core Governed Harm Spaces

• Harm Context
• Harm Exposure
• Harm Emergence
• Harm Recognition
• Harm Boundary
• Harm Determination
• Harm State
• Harm Change & Propagation
• Harm Containment
• Harm Mitigation
• Harm Recovery & Residual Harm
• Harm Resolution & Finality

HAGA™ Navigation Layer Core Questions Map

HCS → Within what context can Harm meaningfully exist and become
governable?

HES → When and under what conditions does a subject or object become
exposed to the possibility of Harm?

HEMS → When and how does Harm begin to exist?

HRS → When and on what basis does existing or emerging Harm become
recognized for governance?

HBS → What belongs to the governed Harm and what remains outside it?

HDS → Can Harm legitimately be determined to exist, and what governed Harm
has been established?

HSS → What is the current governed state of Harm?

HCPS → How does existing Harm change, accumulate, compound, spread,
cascade, or create downstream Harm?

HCOS → How can further expansion, propagation, or escalation of Harm be
bounded or stopped?

HMS → How can existing Harm or its consequences be materially reduced?

HRRHS → What has recovered from Harm, to what extent, and what Harm
continues to remain?

HRFS → When can governed Harm legitimately be considered resolved, and
when has its lifecycle reached finality?

Architectural Position

HAGA™ governs the complete Harm Governance lifecycle from Harm Context and
Exposure through Harm Resolution and Finality.

The architecture progresses:

Harm Context → Harm Exposure → Harm Emergence → Harm Recognition → Harm
Boundary → Harm Determination → Harm State → Harm Change & Propagation →
Harm Containment → Harm Mitigation → Harm Recovery & Residual Harm → Harm
Resolution & Finality

Together these standards govern the context in which Harm can exist, when
exposure occurs, how Harm emerges and becomes recognized, what belongs
within its governed boundary, whether Harm can legitimately be
established, what its current state is, how it changes or propagates, how
further Harm is contained, how existing Harm is mitigated, what recovers
and what remains, and when the Harm lifecycle can legitimately reach
Resolution and Finality.

Its lifecycle becomes recursive when material Harm conditions change:

Governed Harm → Harm State Change → Change & Propagation → Containment →
Mitigation → Recovery & Residual Harm → Resolution → Closure

Where post-Closure Harm reality materially changes:

Closure → Reopening → Appropriate HAGA™ Re-Entry Point → Renewed Harm
Governance → Resolution → Closure

Where sufficient terminal conditions are established:

Resolution → Closure → Finality

This recursive structure allows Harm Governance to remain responsive to
Harm progression, propagation, renewed Harm, Recovery regression, Residual
Harm change, latent Harm manifestation, Resolution degradation, Closure
invalidation, and legitimate lifecycle Reopening. Cross-Architecture
Boundary

HAGA™ ↔ ORA™

ORA™ governs what is actually occurring in Operational Reality. HAGA™
governs Harm existing, emerging, changing, propagating, persisting,
recovering, or reaching Resolution within that reality.

HAGA™ ↔ AGA™

HAGA™ governs the Harm lifecycle. AGA™ governs authority, responsibility,
accountability, attribution, and related accountability relationships
surrounding harmful activity and consequences.

HAGA™ ↔ ADIT®

HAGA™ governs Harm and its lifecycle states. ADIT® governs evidential
observation, preservation, verification, correlation, examination, and
auditability.

HAGA™ ↔ VALIDOS™

HAGA™ governs Harm Determination and subsequent Harm lifecycle governance.
VALIDOS™ governs whether a validation basis sufficiently supports a
Validation Determination and intended reliance.

HAGA™ ↔ INTEGROS®

HAGA™ governs Harm as a distinct lifecycle object. INTEGROS® governs
integrity across objects, states, evidence, and processes.

HAGA™ ↔ AIG®

HAGA™ governs Harm that may result from AI behavior. AIG® governs AI
behavioral governance and behavioral integrity.

HAGA™ ↔ ASGA™

HAGA™ governs Harm that may result from autonomous operation. ASGA™
governs autonomous-system authority, execution, constraints, coordination,
intervention, escalation, and operational governability.

HAGA™ ↔ VFM®

HAGA™ governs what Harm exists and what happens to that Harm throughout
its lifecycle. VFM® governs what happens to Value as a consequence of
events and conditions.

HAGA™ ↔ SIMULOS®

HAGA™ governs actual Harm. SIMULOS® governs simulation purpose, structure,
execution, outputs, and lifecycle.

HAGA™ ↔ Harm-Producing Mechanisms

HAGA™ governs the Harm lifecycle. Human actions, AI behavior, autonomous
actions, physical interactions, organizational processes, system failures,
environmental conditions, and composite operations constitute or
contribute to mechanisms through which Harm may arise. Foundational
Architecture Distinctions

Harm Governance ≠ Governance of the Harm-Producing Mechanism

Harm-Relevant Occurrence ≠ Established Harm

Exposure ≠ Harm

Recognition ≠ Harm Emergence

Unrecognized Harm ≠ Non-Existing Harm

Harm Boundary ≠ Operational Boundary

Harm Determination ≠ Liability Determination

Harm ≠ Accountability

Harm ≠ Liability

Evidence of Harm ≠ Harm Governance

Validated Evidence ≠ Harm Determination by Itself

Harm State ≠ Harm History

Harm Change ≠ New Harm by Default

Accumulation ≠ Propagation

Propagation ≠ Cascading

Containment ≠ Mitigation

Mitigation ≠ Recovery

Recovery ≠ Restoration of the Pre-Harm State

Recovery ≠ Resolution

Remaining Harm During Recovery ≠ Residual Harm by Default

Residual Harm ≠ Failed Recovery

Residual Harm ≠ Value Loss

Resolution ≠ Closure

Closure ≠ Finality

Residual Harm Exists ≠ Resolution Impossible

Residual Harm Exists ≠ Finality Impossible

Reopening ≠ New Harm by Default

Reopening ≠ Historical Resolution Invalid

Finality ≠ Harm Erasure Canonical Principle

HAGA™ does not govern the operational mechanism that produced Harm,
perform general incident investigation, determine general causation,
allocate accountability or liability, administer claims or compensation,
determine Value consequences, perform evidence governance, make validation
determinations, or substitute for legal, medical, safety, regulatory, or
domain-specific systems. HAGA™ governs the methodological conditions under
which Harm becomes contextually identifiable, exposure-aware, emergent,
recognizable, bounded, determinable, state-governed, traceable through
change and propagation, containable, mitigable, recoverable where
possible, distinguishable from Residual Harm, legitimately resolvable,
closable, reopenable when Harm reality changes, and capable of reaching
governed Finality throughout its lifecycle.

HAGA™ governs Harm from exposure to finality.