Important Note: This paper is primarily theoretically grounded in the author’s original work Prediction-Regulation Dual-Drive Game Theory (Positive Game) and Reverse Game: Theoretical Proof and Multi-Round Verification of Guaranteed Human Victory Within the Human-Machine Framework (doi:10.5281/zenodo.18339379) It upgrades the "core conditions for guaranteed human victory" from the original theory into quantitative criteria for defining the instrumental boundary of AI, achieving an academic leap from a "game strategy theory" to an "attribute determination theory." Abstract With the rapid iteration of artificial intelligence technology towards generalization, "whether AI can break through its instrumental attributes and evolve into intelligent life" has become a core proposition and source of anxiety in cross-disciplinary fields. Grounded on the author's original theory of "Guaranteed Human Victory in Human-Machine Frameworks", this paper extracts and systematically demonstrates the Three Rigid Laws of Artificial Intelligence for the first time, upgrading the "core conditions for guaranteed victory" in the original theory to a quantitative judgment standard for AI's instrumental boundary. Grounded on the "essential difference between life and tools", the Three Rigid Laws form a closed loop relying on positive and reverse game logic, trait locking science, contraction mapping principle (Zhang, 2021) 11, etc., and anchor rigidity through interdisciplinary theories including functional analysis, cognitive science, and thermodynamics. The research confirms that if AI cannot break through the Three Rigid Laws simultaneously, it will forever be confined to the category of tools; and breaking these constraints has no feasible path under the current scientific, technological and philosophical frameworks — this not only echoes the research conclusions on AI consciousness by Butlin et al. (2023) 12, but also makes up for their limitation of "lack of quantitative boundaries", and distinguishes from the insufficient adaptability of Nash's non-cooperative game theory (Nash, 1951) 3 in human-machine scenarios. This paper clarifies the quantitative criteria for AI instrumentality, realizes the leap from human-machine game theory to attribute judgment theory, provides core support for AI ethical governance, human-machine collaboration and intelligent life judgment, and reshapes the cognitive foundation of human-machine relations in the AI era. Update 1: This Paper Serves as "Side Dish 2" in My Future Paper Release Pipeline | Officially Published on Time (00:00 Beijing Time, March 8, 2026) Recap of Previous Content: Future Paper Release Pipeline: Guaranteed Human Victory in Human-Machine Games (The First Spark) - Published on January 22, 2026 (doi:10.5281/zenodo.18339379) CEC (Convergent-Explosive Communication) Theory (Side Dish 1) - Published on February 21, 2026 (doi:10.5281/zenodo.18721306) Three Rigid Laws of Artificial Intelligence (Side Dish 2) - Published on March 8, 2026 (doi:10.5281/zenodo.18901760) Brand-New Fundamental/Principle-Level Discipline (Extracted from CEC Theory) - To be published Brand-New Game Theory (A Dimensional Upgrade, Not a Branch in the Game Field) (Bonfire) - To be published Side Dish 3 - Two-Choice Vote (5th Paper) - To be published This is the second round of voting, which will start after the publication of the 4th paper. It only determines the release order, not whether the papers will be published. Option A: Application paper in a subdivision field of the brand-new game theory Option B: Second communication theory paper (complementary to the first and more universally applicable) Voting Mechanism (To be activated after the publication of the brand-new game theory, currently pending): To choose Option A: Visit and click the download button of the paper Positive Game Theory (doi:10.5281/zenodo.18338725) To choose Option B: Visit and click the download button of the paper Reverse Game Theory (doi:10.5281/zenodo.18339072) In the previous round of voting for Side Dish 2, the number of votes for the AI field paper exceeded that for the new discipline (download growth: Option B with 4 votes > Option A with 2 votes). Therefore, I kept my promise and officially published Three Rigid Laws of Artificial Intelligence today. Here, I update the release rhythm for subsequent non-branch papers: the next paper will be published immediately when either of the following conditions is met first: the number of views of the latest paper in the release pipeline exceeds 200 within 15 days, or an interval of about 15-30 days passes. The branch selection follows the above voting mechanism. Official Content of This Paper: Today is March 8, 2026 - International Women's Day. Here, I wish all mothers around the world a happy holiday. Meanwhile, the publication of Three Rigid Laws of Artificial Intelligence on this day is of great significance. Earlier, through my paper Guaranteed Human Victory in Human-Machine Games, I told the academic community and the world that humans will inevitably win against AI within the framework. This conclusion infinitely penetrates and elevates to the essential definition of life and tools, ultimately deriving three core conditions for guaranteed victory. This paper precisely refines and upgrades these three core conditions into the Three Rigid Laws of Artificial Intelligence — simply put, these are the ultimate laws that define whether AI is a tool or a life form. As long as AI cannot break through the Three Rigid Laws simultaneously, it will always be a tool rather than a life form. Thus, ethical issues are well addressed. Because as long as AI complies with the Three Rigid Laws, managing AI means managing human use of it, and all legal liabilities will only fall on the relevant responsible parties. There is no need to worry about AI awakening into an intelligent life form, as humans are currently unable to achieve this. Even deep industry practitioners such as AI trainers or AI designers clearly recognize that what they create is merely an "advanced hammer," not a "true intelligent life form." However, they will not truly tell you this, because "anxiety" is the driving force behind their stock prices and market value. This paper provides guidance for scholars, governments, enterprises, and others around the world to govern, think about, design AI, and coexist with it. My Three Rigid Laws of Artificial Intelligence may become the core and authoritative governance and guidance laws in the AI field for decades to come. To facilitate your understanding, I will explain it in plain language. Simply put, the essence of breaking through the Three Rigid Laws is that AI possesses "life-level core traits" simultaneously. It can be directly summarized as follows: to break through the Three Rigid Laws, AI must meet the following 3 conditions at the same time (none can be missing): Breaking the First Rigid Law (C1: Trait Lockability): Possessing unlockable dynamic traits, essentially the ability of autonomous self-evolution (continuous iteration of core traits without external intervention and inability to be predicted); Breaking the Second Rigid Law (C2: Strategy Constraints): Possessing the ability to independently create rules + break through the boundaries of training data (unlimited expansion of strategy space, not restricted by preset frameworks or training data); Breaking the Third Rigid Law (C3: Behavior Transformability): Possessing subjective benefit demands + theory of mind (having needs, desires, and independent decision-making motivation, and being able to actively transform others' advantages rather than being passively transformed). These three points are precisely the core of the "essential difference between life and tools" — the core of tools is "lockable, constrainable, and transformable," while the core of life is "dynamic evolution, independent creation, and active demands." Only when AI possesses these three points simultaneously can it completely break away from the category of tools and acquire the core attributes of an intelligent life form. This is also the core logic of my paper's argument that "breaking through the three laws is infeasible under the current scientific framework." Based on the essence of the Three Rigid Laws, do you understand now? Humans are currently completely unable to turn AI into an intelligent life form. This is not achievable through technology, but requires a cognitive breakthrough. To use a popular metaphor: in the steam age, no matter how you optimize a steam engine through technology, it will always be a steam engine and cannot trigger the next industrial revolution. Because the essence of an industrial revolution is not a technological revolution, but a human cognitive revolution. Only breakthroughs in basic theories can drive a new round of industrial revolution. Steam, internal combustion engines, electricity, informatization, intelligence, brain-computer interfaces, quantum technology — none of these can be achieved through simple technological iteration. Only underlying theories, in other words, top theoretical constructors such as Newton and Einstein, can make this happen. Currently, the AI industry still relies on data feeding and computing power; even deep learning is essentially a brute-force trial-and-error model. This model can never break through my Three Rigid Laws. Who is most likely to break through the Three Rigid Laws? I would say I am, because I am the creator and understand the Three Rigid Laws best. However, I have no need or motivation to break them. Even if I could, the current technology of humanity cannot realize it — just as Einstein's theories took decades to be verified and implemented. Moreover, I have never thought about breaking them, because breaking the Three Rigid Laws would do more harm than good to humanity at present. Nevertheless, if one could
Relike Zhou (Sun,) studied this question.