Akamai Intelligence Group
Public research document. Responsive HTML edition generated from AIG_DICE_ONE_PAGE_CAPABILITY_SUMMARY.md.

AKAMAI INTELLIGENCE GROUP ONE-PAGE DICE CAPABILITY SUMMARY

Document ID: AIG-DICE-008 Classification: UNCLASSIFIED // PUBLIC RELEASE Version: 0.2 | Public release | June 5, 2026 Author: Christopher Ramos Research and drafting support: Deus ex Machina Status: PUBLIC CAPABILITY SUMMARY

AIG POSITIONING

Akamai Intelligence Group (AIG) develops governed collective-intelligence architecture for heterogeneous AI agents operating under human control in contested, long-time-horizon environments.

AIG's core contribution is not another centralized orchestration layer and not an ad hoc agent swarm. AIG demonstrates decentralized, role-governed collective coordination where local inference, sparse activation, authority boundaries, state provenance, and adversarial integrity are first-class controls.

DICE ALIGNMENT

The DARPA DICE program seeks theory and algorithms for decentralized coordination and local inference control to enable scalable, adaptive, resilient collectives of heterogeneous AI agents that can autonomously execute sustained missions in contested environments while remaining under human control.

AIG directly aligns with this objective through:

CURRENT EXECUTABLE EVIDENCE

AIG has already demonstrated a Phase I-scale governed collective in local harnesses and empirically evaluated its interaction-governance behavior.

Current evidence:

CORE TECHNICAL DIFFERENTIATOR

AIG treats scale as governed interaction capacity, not raw agent count.

In Phase I-scale testing, AIG instantiated 500 logical agents while permitting only 2,875 of 249,500 possible all-to-all interaction paths. The architecture blocked or throttled 246,675 paths while preserving authority enforcement, false-consensus detection, rogue-coalition detection, and Ghost Field observability.

This supports the central DICE-relevant claim:

DICE-scale collective intelligence will fail if coordination grows faster than governance. AIG's current empirical evidence shows the opposite pattern under tested local harness conditions: as the collective grows, interaction is constrained by authority, budget, role, provenance, and risk.

HUMAN CONTROL AND AUTHORITY SAFETY

AIG separates command authority, consequence modeling, and probabilistic forecasting:

This prevents prediction, recommendation, and command from collapsing into one unsafe control channel.

EVALUATION-FIRST ARCHITECTURE

AIG's DICE posture is backed by executable evaluation artifacts:

PHASE I FIT

AIG is ready to map the final DICE BAA requirements against an existing evidence base and test harness rather than inventing the architecture after release.

Phase I execution would reinforce and extend the existing system by:

  1. aligning the current governance model to final BAA metrics;
  2. adding BAA-specific decentralized coordination and local-inference tests;
  3. expanding adversarial and contested-environment evaluation scenarios;
  4. producing traceable artifacts from requirement to harness to metric;
  5. preparing a transition path from local Ghost Field evaluation to sharded, queue-backed, or distributed event-bus substrates.

BOTTOM LINE

AIG is not building a pile of chatbots. AIG is building a context-governed collective-intelligence architecture for controlled emergence.

Agents are replaceable. Context architecture is the control plane.