Literature Positioning

Schoeller et al. (2021) is the nearest theoretical neighbor. Provides trust-as-virtual-control and empowerment concepts but lacks objective function specification, neurobiological breakdown layer, exploitative/supportive distinction, recursion resolution, caring orientation, and AI understanding layer.

Active inference psychotherapy literature independently articulated the core topology (external agent restoring another agent's capacity for self-directed inference). Provides therapeutic validation that the topology works. Does not provide AI understanding, real-time physiological sensing, formal objective function, caring governance, cost/access constraint, or removal test.

Adaptive automation/augmented cognition (DARPA, NASA) is the closest existing engineering. Demonstrated closed-loop physiological state monitoring. Critical difference: their system replaces the human when degraded; ours stabilizes the human.

JITAI/behavioral health control engineering uses control theory for behavior change with machine-as-controller. Different machine, different topology, different objective. Engineering methods transfer; architecture does not.

Second-order cybernetics anticipated the conceptual structure (observer-included, autonomy-preserving, model-based regulation). This architecture is a modern instantiation completed with neurobiological grounding and AI understanding capabilities the classical tradition did not have.

Formal objective functions exist in recommender systems (clicks, dwell time). The hostile scaffolding literature provides philosophical grounding for the exploitative side. Nobody has formally contrasted exploitative vs. supportive control architectures in control-theoretic terms.

The 4E hostile scaffolding literature provides philosophical articulation of technology-as-threat-to-agency, including the techno-wantonness concept. It lacks neurobiological mechanism, engineering specification, closed-loop sensing, and caring governance -- precisely what AgentSee provides.

Ramstead et al. (2023) derive abstract consciousness requirements from FEP. If covert action (precision-weighting) is required for consciousness, and Arnsten mechanisms degrade precision-weighting, then stress-induced capacity loss has a formal connection to consciousness disruption. Theoretical, depends on the derivation being correct.

IWMT (Safron 2020, 2022, 2026) is the nearest computational neighbor for the human side. Provides a candidate computational definition of coherence. Does not specify how an external system should detect, respond to, or prevent degradation of the generative model.

LLM + wearable systems (2024-2026) reduce the risk that the AgentSee architecture is infeasible but do not address agency-as-objective, human-as-controller topology, or caring governance.

Personal informatics (Li et al. 2010) shares the "machine observes, human decides" philosophy but lacks control-theoretic formalization, physiological state estimation, AI understanding layer, and objective function specification.

Frankfurt, Bratman, Sen, and Nussbaum provide normative and structural foundations for the objective function. The control-theoretic translation with neurobiological grounding and caring governance is not found in the philosophical literature.

The proposed system is categorically different from JITAI, adaptive automation, and generic HRI systems because the machine has an understanding layer. This is not a different setting on the same machine -- it is a categorically different machine.

Rehabilitation robotics independently articulated "stabilize, don't replace" and formalized assist-as-needed in specific motor rehab domains. This work generalizes the principle to agency capacity and adds AI understanding plus caring governance.

SDT has autonomy-support as design heuristic. Nobody has specified autonomy as optimization objective for an adaptive system or connected SDT autonomy to control-theoretic controllability/observability.