Submitted to SSRN · public abstract page pending · Policy paper

Human Agency Under Consequential State: A Policy Framework for Correction, Revalidation, and Recoverable Consequences

Micheal Charles Preble · Independent Researcher · September 2026

Policy paper · Manuscript v4 · SSRN 7509878 · Submitted to SSRN · public abstract page pending

Summary

Policy paper. This is the policy paper (SSRN 7509878). It is distinct from the research paper, Human Agency Under Consequential State: Correction, Revalidation, and Recoverable Consequences in Persistent Computational Systems (SSRN 7496758), and is not a version of it.

Persistent computational systems can preserve the effects of earlier classifications, scores, inferences, and decisions after the state that supported them has changed. This paper argues that correction is incomplete when the source record changes but materially dependent consequences remain operative. It distinguishes correction from revalidation and develops a Consequence Revalidation Framework for deciding whether continuing consequences retain adequate authority. It introduces corrective continuity: the capacity of a valid correction to remain effective across the decision and consequence pathways through which superseded state would otherwise continue to affect a person over time.

The paper describes an operational lifecycle of correction, dependency, provenance, participation, revalidation, remedy, and closure.

Evidence status: Policy analysis and proposed framework. It does not report new empirical results.

Record note: SSRN title correction requested September 23, 2026. The repository record may temporarily display the earlier research-paper title.

Suggested citation
Preble, Micheal Charles. “Human Agency Under Consequential State: A Policy Framework for Correction, Revalidation, and Recoverable Consequences.” Manuscript v4, September 2026. SSRN 7509878, submitted to SSRN, 2026.

The Problem

Persistent computational systems can preserve the effects of earlier classifications, scores, inferences, and decisions after the state that supported them has changed. Correction is incomplete when the source record changes but materially dependent consequences remain operative.

What This Work Contributes

Distinguishes correction from revalidation and develops a Consequence Revalidation Framework for deciding whether continuing consequences retain adequate authority. Introduces corrective continuity: the capacity of a valid correction to remain effective across the decision and consequence pathways through which superseded state would otherwise continue to affect a person over time.

How the Argument Works

Describes an operational lifecycle of correction, dependency, provenance, participation, revalidation, remedy, and closure. Policy analysis and proposed framework.

Evidence Status

Evidence status: Policy analysis and proposed framework; no new empirical results.

How evidence status works across this site →

What This Does Not Claim

  • Does not report new empirical results.
  • Is the policy paper (SSRN 7509878); distinct from and not a version of the companion research paper (SSRN 7496758).

Limitations & Open Questions

SSRN title correction requested September 23, 2026; the repository record may temporarily display the earlier research-paper title.

For different readers

Who this is for

Researchers

Methods, protocols, and evidence status for this research area.

Media

Plain-language framing and exact claim boundaries.

Industry

System requirements and design implications.

Related Research

Companion to the research paper. Connects to Governing Relationship State. See also For Policy & Think Tanks and Consequence.

Artifact Family

The standard derivative-product family for this paper. Only artifacts that actually exist are linked; the rest are planned and not yet produced.