TrigGuard is built on established research in executive function volatility, impulsivity modelling, stress-induced cognitive degradation, and state-dependent decision impairment. This page outlines the mechanisms that justify deterministic execution boundaries in high-risk digital environments.
// 01
Executive Function Volatility
Executive function governs inhibition, working memory, and decision gating. Under cognitive load, executive control degrades, increasing the probability of irreversible action.
Foundational Research
- Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioural inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions.
- Miyake et al. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions.
- Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions.
Mechanism
- Reduced inhibitory control → increased action execution probability
- Decision fatigue → lowered evaluation threshold
- Emotional load → reduced gating precision
TrigGuard Response
Implementation of an external deterministic execution boundary (TG_EXECUTION_BOUNDARY).
// 02
Impulsivity as Execution Risk
Impulsivity is not randomness. It is a measurable reduction in delay discounting tolerance and action evaluation latency.
Key Research
- Ainslie, G. (1975). Hyperbolic discounting.
- Evenden, J. L. (1999). Varieties of impulsivity.
- Bechara, A. et al. (2001). Decision-making deficits and future consequences.
Mechanism
- Immediate reward bias
- Reduced temporal projection
- Increased irreversible action likelihood
TrigGuard Response
Fail-closed interruption before irreversible execution.
// 03
Stress & Cognitive Degradation
Acute stress alters prefrontal cortex regulation, shifting control toward reactive systems.
Key Research
- Arnsten, A. F. T. (2009). Stress signalling pathways impair PFC function.
- McEwen, B. S. (2007). Allostatic load.
- Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. T. (2009). Stress-induced habit behaviour.
Mechanism
- Reduced executive gating
- Increased reflexive behaviour
- State-dependent decision collapse
TrigGuard Response
State-independent deterministic enforcement.
// 04
Sensory & Cognitive Overload
High stimulus density degrades evaluation bandwidth.
Key Research
- Lavie, N. (2005). Load theory of attention.
- Mark, G. et al. (2008). The cost of interrupted work.
- Kahneman, D. (2011). Cognitive load and system processing.
Mechanism
- Reduced signal discrimination
- Higher action error probability
- Increased decision latency variability
TrigGuard Response
Externalised execution control layer.
// 05
Irreversible Action Theory
Irreversible digital actions — financial transfers, submissions, contracts, publication — carry asymmetric risk.
Conceptual Foundations
- Taleb, N. N. (2012). Antifragility and convex risk exposure.
- Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory.
- Error-cost asymmetry in safety engineering (IEC 61508, Leveson 2011).
Mechanism
- Low probability, high cost failure
- State-dependent execution instability
TrigGuard Response
Fail-closed execution boundary prior to commitment surface.
// Architectural Conclusion
Position
TrigGuard does not treat conditions.
It mitigates execution instability.
The TG_EXECUTION_BOUNDARY is a deterministic enforcement layer informed by:
- Executive function research
- Impulsivity modelling
- Stress neurobiology
- Cognitive load theory
- Risk asymmetry frameworks
This architecture applies across neurotypes and industries.
No identity assumptions are required.
// References
Source Literature
- Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioural inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 65-94.
- Miyake, A. et al. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex frontal lobe tasks. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49-100.
- Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135-168.
- Ainslie, G. (1975). Specious reward: A behavioural theory of impulsiveness and impulse control. Psychological Bulletin, 82(4), 463-496.
- Evenden, J. L. (1999). Varieties of impulsivity. Psychopharmacology, 146(4), 348-361.
- Bechara, A. et al. (2001). Decision-making deficits, linked to a dysfunctional ventromedial prefrontal cortex, revealed in alcohol and stimulant abusers. Neuropsychologia, 39(4), 376-389.
- Arnsten, A. F. T. (2009). Stress signalling pathways that impair prefrontal cortex structure and function. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(6), 410-422.
- McEwen, B. S. (2007). Physiology and neurobiology of stress and adaptation: Central role of the brain. Physiological Reviews, 87(3), 873-904.
- Schwabe, L. & Wolf, O. T. (2009). Stress prompts habit behaviour in humans. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(22), 7191-7198.
- Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(2), 75-82.
- Mark, G. et al. (2008). The cost of interrupted work: More speed and stress. Proceedings of CHI 2008, 107-110.
- Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
- Taleb, N. N. (2012). Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder. Random House.
- Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.