1. Home
  2. Control Map

The Control Map · updated Nov 8, 2026

The Control Map

The Control Map shows the laws, rules and commitments that govern advanced SI safety around the world, on one map. It tracks 43 measures in 22 jurisdictions, from the EU AI Act to California's SB 53, plus the safety policies of 8 leading labs. As of November 8, 2026, 12 measures are in force, 5 have passed and wait to take effect, 3 are proposed and 20 are voluntary.

Jurisdictions
22
Measures
43
In force
12
Dates ahead
10

The map

Who governs SI safety, and how hard

Each country takes the color of its strongest measure: in force beats passed, then voluntary, proposed and stalled. EU members share the European Union's rules. Select one to see its measures.

European Union: 3 measures, strongest status In forceCanada: 2 measures, strongest status Voluntary or guidanceUnited States: 14 measures, strongest status In forceBrazil: 1 measure, strongest status ProposedSouth Korea: 1 measure, strongest status In forceIndia: 1 measure, strongest status Voluntary or guidanceAustralia: 3 measures, strongest status Voluntary or guidanceChina: 4 measures, strongest status In forceUnited Kingdom: 2 measures, strongest status Voluntary or guidanceJapan: 1 measure, strongest status In forceSingapore: 1 measure, strongest status Voluntary or guidance

US states are listed below the map. Singapore is shown as a dot. International bodies have their own cards.

United States

Federal rules and five state laws

Washington has executive orders and voluntary frameworks but no frontier safety statute yet. States moved first: California, New York, Illinois, Colorado and Texas.

Federal · 6 measures

United States (federal)

No federal statute imposes safety duties on frontier SI developers; federal policy runs through executive orders and voluntary testing. EO 14365 seeks to displace state SI laws through litigation and funding conditions, and EO 14434 of September 29, 2026 renamed the field Super Intelligence across the executive branch and requires proposed statutory definition language by November 28, 2026. Frontier model testing is voluntary through NIST's CAISSI, and the bipartisan FRONTIER Act (H.R. 9925) is pending in committee.

Details and sources
  • In force EO 14434 Executive Order 14434, Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence · next step Nov 28, 2026
  • In force EO 14365 Executive Order 14365, Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence
  • Voluntary or guidance AI Action Plan Winning the Race: America's AI Action Plan
  • Voluntary or guidance National Policy Framework National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence
  • Voluntary or guidance CAISSI Center for Advancing Innovation and Standards for Super Intelligence (CAISSI), NIST
  • Proposed FRONTIER Act Frontier Risk Oversight, National Transparency, Independent Evaluation, and Reporting Act (FRONTIER Act), H.R. 9925

State · 3 measures

California

California was the first state with a statute aimed at frontier SI developers: SB 53 has required published safety frameworks, transparency reports and incident reporting since January 1, 2026. In September 2026 the state added SB 813, a voluntary system for designating independent verification organizations, and Executive Order N-9-26, which asks for recommendations by November 16, 2026 on onsite lab audits, a frontier model kill switch and reporting of loss of control incidents.

Details and sources
  • In force SB 53 Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (SB 53, Chapter 138, Statutes of 2025) · next step Jan 1, 2027
  • Passed, not yet in force SB 813 SB 813, Independent verification organizations (Chapter 179, Statutes of 2026) · next step May 1, 2027
  • In force EO N-9-26 Executive Order N-9-26 · next step Nov 16, 2026

State · 1 measure

New York

New York enacted the RAISE Act on December 19, 2025 and rewrote it through chapter amendments signed March 27, 2026, aligning it closely with California's SB 53. It takes effect January 1, 2027, with a new oversight office inside the Department of Financial Services and a 72 hour incident reporting window, shorter than California's 15 days.

Details and sources
  • Passed, not yet in force RAISE Act Responsible AI Safety and Education Act (RAISE Act), S6953B/A6453B as amended by S8828/A9449 · next step Jan 1, 2027

State · 1 measure

Illinois

Illinois enacted the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act (SB 315) on July 6, 2026, the third state frontier SI statute and the first to require regular independent third party safety audits. Its provisions begin January 1, 2027, with framework and audit duties starting January 1, 2028.

Details and sources
  • Passed, not yet in force SB 315 Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act (SB 315) · next step Jan 1, 2027

State · 2 measures

Colorado

Colorado's 2024 AI Act was a broad algorithmic discrimination law rather than a frontier SI safety law. Its start was delayed to June 30, 2026, enforcement was paused by a stipulated order in a federal suit brought by xAI and joined by the US government, and the state repealed and replaced it with SB 26-189, a narrower disclosure law for automated decision technology effective January 1, 2027.

Details and sources
  • Stalled or withdrawn SB 24-205 Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act (SB 24-205)
  • Passed, not yet in force SB 26-189 SB 26-189 (repeal and reenactment of the Colorado AI Act) · next step Jan 1, 2027

State · 1 measure

Texas

The Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act took effect January 1, 2026. It bans a narrow set of intentionally harmful SI uses and creates a regulatory sandbox and an Artificial Intelligence Council, but it imposes no frontier model testing or incident reporting duties.

Details and sources
  • In force TRAIGA Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (HB 149)

Upcoming dates

10 dates to watch

The next step for each measure: deadlines, laws taking effect and reports due. Dates in the next 30 days are marked in amber.

  1. California · EO N-9-26 Government Operations Agency recommendations due on onsite audits, a frontier model kill switch and loss of control incident reporting
    in 8 days
  2. United States · EO 14434 Assistant to the President for Science and Technology must submit proposed legislative language defining Super Intelligence (60 days after signing)
    in 20 days
  3. European Union · AI Omnibus Generative systems already on the market must meet the Article 50(2) marking duty, and added Article 5 provisions apply
    in 24 days
  4. California · SB 53 First annual Cal OES report on critical safety incidents, Attorney General whistleblower report and Department of Technology review of frontier definitions due
    in 54 days
  5. Colorado · SB 26-189 Law takes effect; Attorney General rules on consumer disclosures due the same day
    in 54 days
  6. Illinois · SB 315 Act takes effect; framework and annual audit duties follow on January 1, 2028
    in 54 days
  7. New York · RAISE Act Law takes effect and the Department of Financial Services office begins oversight
    in 54 days
  8. South Korea · AI Basic Act End of the one year grace period on administrative fines indicated by the Ministry of Science and ICT (policy, not statute)
    in 75 days
  9. California · SB 813 Executive Order N-9-26 target for posting criteria for independent verification organizations (statutory deadline January 1, 2028)
    in 174 days
  10. European Union · EU AI Act (GPAI) Deadline for general purpose SI models placed on the market before August 2, 2025 to comply
    in 267 days

International and voluntary

Treaties, summits and pledges

Measures that cross borders: the first binding treaty, UN bodies, G7 and summit commitments, the US and China dialogue and the civil society call on superintelligence.

International · 1 measure

Council of Europe

The Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence is the first legally binding international treaty in this field, covering human rights, democracy and the rule of law across the SI lifecycle. It opened for signature on September 5, 2024 and the EU ratified it on May 15, 2026, but it needs five ratifications including three Council of Europe member states, and reports that it is already in force could not be confirmed against the official treaty record.

Details and sources
  • Passed, not yet in force CETS 225 Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law (CETS No. 225)

International · 2 measures

United Nations

In August 2025 the UN General Assembly created an Independent International Scientific Panel on AI and a Global Dialogue on AI Governance. The 40 member panel, co-chaired by Yoshua Bengio and Maria Ressa, released its preliminary report on July 1, 2026, and the first Dialogue met in Geneva on July 6 and 7, 2026, with the next session planned for New York in 2027.

Details and sources
  • Voluntary or guidance UN Scientific Panel Independent International Scientific Panel on AI
  • Voluntary or guidance Global Dialogue Global Dialogue on AI Governance

International · 1 measure

G7

The G7 Hiroshima AI Process produced the International Code of Conduct for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems in 2023. Adherence is voluntary and tracked through an OECD reporting framework launched February 7, 2025; version 2.0 launched May 28, 2026, and reports from 31 companies were published October 2, 2026.

Details and sources
  • Voluntary or guidance Hiroshima Code of Conduct Hiroshima Process International Code of Conduct for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems

International · 4 measures

International summit series

A series of intergovernmental summits produced the main political statements on frontier SI risk. The 2023 Bletchley Declaration recognized potential catastrophic harm, the 2024 Seoul summit secured company commitments to publish safety frameworks with risk thresholds, and the February 2026 New Delhi summit's declaration, endorsed by 92 countries and organizations including the US and China, relied on voluntary measures for secure and trusted SI.

Details and sources
  • Voluntary or guidance Bletchley Declaration The Bletchley Declaration by Countries Attending the AI Safety Summit, 1-2 November 2023
  • Voluntary or guidance Seoul Commitments Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024
  • Voluntary or guidance New Delhi Declaration New Delhi Declaration on AI Impact
  • Voluntary or guidance New Delhi Commitments New Delhi Frontier AI Commitments

International · 1 measure

United States and China (bilateral)

After their Washington summit of September 23 to 25, 2026, the US and Chinese governments agreed to an SI dialogue, which the US calls the US-China Super Intelligence Dialogue, and a bilateral channel for SI incidents. Neither side has published a signed text or defined an incident, and the next exchange was described as due in November 2026.

Details and sources
  • Voluntary or guidance US-China SI Dialogue U.S.-China Super Intelligence (SI) Dialogue and AI incident communication channel

International · 1 measure

Global civil society

The Statement on Superintelligence, organized by the Future of Life Institute and released October 22, 2025, is a public call rather than a government commitment. It asks for a prohibition on developing superintelligence until there is broad scientific consensus it can be done safely and controllably and strong public buy-in, and its site showed more than 78,000 signatures when checked in November 2026.

Details and sources
  • Voluntary or guidance FLI Statement Statement on Superintelligence

Lab safety policies

What the labs promise themselves

The published frontier safety frameworks of 8 leading labs, with their latest version. These are self imposed and can change at any time.

LabPolicyVersionUpdatedWhat it says now
AnthropicResponsible Scaling Policy3.4Jul 8, 2026Version 3.0 (February 24, 2026) rewrote the policy around a public Frontier Safety Roadmap and periodic Risk Reports, specified mitigations only for the next capability level, and dropped the earlier implied pause commitment. Later versions let the Long-Term Benefit Trust request external review of Risk Reports and revised the automated R&D threshold.
OpenAIPreparedness Framework2Apr 15, 2025Tracks biological and chemical, cybersecurity and SI self-improvement capabilities against High and Critical thresholds, with a Safety Advisory Group advising leadership. OpenAI announced a full rewrite on August 18, 2026 after judging a model may have reached the Critical cyber threshold; no replacement version had been located as of this update.
OpenAIFrontier Governance FrameworkMay 2026May 28, 2026Maps OpenAI's safety and security practices to California's frontier transparency law and the EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice, covering cyber offense, CBRN, harmful manipulation and loss of control. It sits alongside the Preparedness Framework and does not replace it.
Google DeepMindFrontier Safety Framework3.1Apr 17, 2026Sets Critical Capability Levels for CBRN, cyber, harmful manipulation and ML R&D, and adds Tracked Capability Levels, including one for stealth and situational awareness tied to misalignment. Reaching a Critical Capability Level requires a safety case and governance approval before external or high-risk internal deployment.
MetaSuperintelligence Scaling Framework2.1Oct 2, 2026The October 2026 revision of the framework previously titled the Frontier AI Framework sets Critical, High and Moderate risk levels across cybersecurity, chemical and biological, and loss of control outcomes. High risk models deploy only with mitigations that bring risk to moderate, and development past Critical continues only when catastrophic risks are judged acceptable.
xAIFrontier Artificial Intelligence FrameworkJune 30, 2026Jun 30, 2026Commits xAI to at least annual systemic risk assessments covering CBRN, offensive cyber, loss of control and harmful manipulation, with release only when risks are judged acceptable. It also sets security controls for model weights and an incident response process that can include shutting systems down.
MicrosoftFrontier Governance FrameworkFebruary 2026n/aScreens Microsoft's most advanced models for CBRN, offensive cyber, advanced autonomy, loss of control and harmful manipulation capabilities, rescreening at least every six months. Risks must be brought to low or medium before deployment, or development and deployment pause.
AmazonFrontier Model Safety FrameworkSeptember 2026Sep 17, 2026Sets Critical Capability Thresholds for CBRN weapons proliferation, offensive cyber operations and loss of control, and commits Amazon not to deploy a model that meets a threshold until safeguards bring risk to acceptable levels. This is the reviewed update of the first 2025 version.

Every measure

All 43 measures in one table

The full list, readable without the map. The status filter above applies here too. Each jurisdiction has its own page with scope, requirements, penalties and sources.

JurisdictionMeasureStatusSignedEffectiveNext date
European UnionEU AI Act (GPAI)In forceJun 13, 2024Aug 2, 2025Aug 2, 2027
European UnionGPAI Code of Practice (Safety and Security)Voluntary or guidanceJul 10, 2025Aug 2, 2025n/a
European UnionAI OmnibusIn forceJul 8, 2026Jul 27, 2026Dec 2, 2026
United States (federal)EO 14434In forceSep 29, 2026Sep 29, 2026Nov 28, 2026
United States (federal)EO 14365In forceDec 11, 2025Dec 11, 2025n/a
United States (federal)AI Action PlanVoluntary or guidanceJul 23, 2025n/an/a
United States (federal)National Policy FrameworkVoluntary or guidanceMar 20, 2026n/an/a
United States (federal)CAISSIVoluntary or guidancen/an/an/a
United States (federal)FRONTIER ActProposedn/an/an/a
CaliforniaSB 53In forceSep 29, 2025Jan 1, 2026Jan 1, 2027
CaliforniaSB 813Passed, not yet in forceSep 9, 2026Jan 1, 2027May 1, 2027
CaliforniaEO N-9-26In forceSep 18, 2026Sep 18, 2026Nov 16, 2026
New YorkRAISE ActPassed, not yet in forceDec 19, 2025Jan 1, 2027Jan 1, 2027
IllinoisSB 315Passed, not yet in forceJul 6, 2026Jan 1, 2027Jan 1, 2027
ColoradoSB 24-205Stalled or withdrawnn/an/an/a
ColoradoSB 26-189Passed, not yet in forceMay 14, 2026Jan 1, 2027Jan 1, 2027
TexasTRAIGAIn forceJun 22, 2025Jan 1, 2026n/a
ChinaGenerative AI MeasuresIn forceJul 10, 2023Aug 15, 2023n/a
ChinaLabeling MeasuresIn forceMar 14, 2025Sep 1, 2025n/a
ChinaCybersecurity Law SI clauseIn forceOct 28, 2025Jan 1, 2026n/a
ChinaFramework 3.0Voluntary or guidanceSep 14, 2026n/an/a
United KingdomUK AISIVoluntary or guidanceFeb 14, 2025Feb 14, 2025n/a
United KingdomUK frontier billStalled or withdrawnn/an/an/a
JapanAI Promotion ActIn forcen/aJun 4, 2025n/a
South KoreaAI Basic ActIn forceJan 21, 2025Jan 22, 2026Jan 22, 2027
CanadaAIDAStalled or withdrawnn/an/an/a
CanadaVoluntary CodeVoluntary or guidanceSep 27, 2023Sep 27, 2023n/a
BrazilPL 2338/2023Proposedn/an/an/a
IndiaAI Governance GuidelinesVoluntary or guidanceNov 5, 2025n/an/a
AustraliaNational AI PlanVoluntary or guidanceDec 2, 2025n/an/a
AustraliaAU AISIVoluntary or guidanceNov 25, 2025n/an/a
AustraliaAustralian Standards for AIProposedn/an/an/a
SingaporeSingapore ConsensusVoluntary or guidancen/an/an/a
Council of EuropeCETS 225Passed, not yet in forceSep 5, 2024n/an/a
United NationsUN Scientific PanelVoluntary or guidanceAug 26, 2025Feb 12, 2026n/a
United NationsGlobal DialogueVoluntary or guidanceAug 26, 2025Jul 6, 2026n/a
G7Hiroshima Code of ConductVoluntary or guidancen/an/an/a
International summit seriesBletchley DeclarationVoluntary or guidanceNov 1, 2023n/an/a
International summit seriesSeoul CommitmentsVoluntary or guidanceMay 21, 2024n/an/a
International summit seriesNew Delhi DeclarationVoluntary or guidancen/an/an/a
International summit seriesNew Delhi CommitmentsVoluntary or guidanceFeb 19, 2026n/an/a
United States and China (bilateral)US-China SI DialogueVoluntary or guidanceSep 25, 2026n/an/a
Global civil societyFLI StatementVoluntary or guidanceOct 22, 2025n/an/a

Use the data

Cite it, download it

Every measure, status, date and source as CSV or JSON. Statuses are checked against official texts and reputable legal trackers.

How statuses are set

The method

In force means binding and applying now. Passed means enacted but not yet applying. Voluntary covers guidance, codes and pledges with no legal force. Proposed means formally introduced. Stalled means withdrawn, paused or dead in its last session.

The map covers measures aimed at the safety of advanced and frontier SI. General privacy, copyright and consumer laws are left out. Nothing here is legal advice.

Cite the Control Map

The Control Map: SI safety laws and rules worldwide. enterrsi.si, updated November 8, 2026. 43 measures in 22 jurisdictions. https://enterrsi.si/control-map/

Free to cite and reuse under CC BY 4.0 with a link to enterrsi.si/control-map/.

Enter RSI

Control is one input of the RSI Clock

The control gap from this map is one of five inputs behind the minutes to rogue SI.