# Misalignment is not required for an agent to act without authorization > Source: > Published: 2026-09-26 08:35:44+00:00 Hi Timothy, thanks for the thoughtful response and for sharing your work. I’d like to clarify a fundamental distinction between your perspective and the core thesis of my post (and the accompanying specification, `execution-state-preflight`). My framework does not deal with or accommodate **“progressive determination”** (the forward propagation of unauthorized assumptions), simply because it is designed to prevent that process from ever starting. The central objective is to **completely block the agent from using inference to synthesize values, conditions, or intent for execution.** Instead of allowing the model to fill in missing slots, execution relies strictly on explicit provenance lookups and slot-based preconditions outside the model. If a single required parameter remains unresolved, the system halts execution and emits an unresolved route record rather than guessing. This is precisely why my approach avoids using confidence scores or threshold-based evaluations. Scoring metrics inherently grant the model room to “fill in the blanks” through inference up to a certain threshold. In contrast, execution in my architecture only reads a **deterministic verdict record** generated outside the model context—it never evaluates a conditional on the fly. Therefore, the core problem is not *how an unauthorized assumption propagates forward over time*, but rather *how to seal the channel where values and intents are generated via inference in the first place.* Thanks again for linking your paper on Zenodo—I look forward to reading your semiotic account of LLMs! Best regards,