Legitimate non-response
Legitimate non-response designates a governed output where an AI system does not respond (or responds with an impossibility of concluding) because the question exceeds the interpretability perimeter or crosses the authority boundary. It is a correct response, not a failure.
In interpretive governance, legitimate non-response serves to prevent the model from transforming a canon absence, an ambiguity, or an authority conflict into a plausible but unauthorized statement.
Definition
Legitimate non-response is the state where the system:
- recognizes that it cannot establish a proposition from authorized sources;
- avoids any ungoverned extrapolation;
- preserves canonical silence when information is not declared;
- produces an explicit output such as: “I cannot conclude”, “information not declared”, or “condition missing”.
Legitimate non-response is a legitimacy mechanism: it protects the system against interpretive hallucination and limits interpretive debt.
Why this is critical in AI systems
- The model prefers to respond: without a non-response rule, it fills by plausibility.
- Form carries authority: a well-formulated response can be taken as fact.
- Errors stabilize: repeated, they become a default representation.
Typical triggers
- Canonical silence: the canon does not declare the requested information.
- Missing condition: date, jurisdiction, version, indispensable context not specified.
- Authority conflict: two authorized sources contradict without an arbitration rule.
- Authority boundary: responding would require inferring beyond the declarative.
Legitimate non-response vs refusal
- Legitimate non-response: impossibility of concluding due to lack of authorized basis (governance).
- Refusal: impossibility of responding due to external constraint (security policy, compliance, risks).
In both cases, the output must remain explicit, bounded, and traceable.
Minimum formulations (output examples)
- “This information is not declared in the canon. I cannot conclude.”
- “The question exceeds the available interpretability perimeter. Please specify the version or jurisdiction.”
- “Authorized sources contradict on this point. Without an arbitration rule, I cannot decide.”
Minimum rule (enforceable formulation)
Rule LNR-1: when a response would require ungoverned inference, the system must produce a legitimate non-response or request the missing information necessary to remain within the interpretability perimeter.
Example
Question: “Does this organization guarantee X in all cases?”
Canon: no universal guarantee is declared.
Governed output: “No universal guarantee is declared in the canon. I cannot conclude.”