Relationship to existing authority
The sources state essential principles. The Guide makes them operational.
The Guide synthesizes the leading architectural, regulatory, engineering, and professional-ethics sources into one architecture-specific method: classification, verification, responsible control, and a contemporaneous record.
| Source | Foundation established by the source | Operational question left open | This Guide’s answer |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIA, Guidance for the Responsible Use of AI (2025) American Institute of Architects | AI output should be reviewed and validated by qualified professionals before reliance. | What qualifies as review and validation, and what demonstrates that they occurred? | Section 2.2 defines verification as a test with a stated criterion, an authoritative source, and a recorded result. Part V and Appendix D specify the contemporaneous record. Part IV applies the test to architectural tasks; Appendix C records the governing project sources and points to those controls. |
| AIA, AI Firm Toolkit (2026) American Institute of Architects | Responsible implementation requires governance, verification, firm policy, standardized workflows, and increasing organizational maturity. | Which uses require controls, where is the gate, and what firm process follows once the gate is crossed? | Section 4.G defines permitted, gated, and prohibited uses; Appendix B records the classification of a specific task. Section 2.2 establishes the verification required at the gate. Part V and Appendix D establish the record, and Appendix A records the firm’s implementation decisions and tool approvals. |
| NCARB, Position on AI (2024, revised 2026) National Council of Architectural Registration Boards | Professional judgment, sealing responsibility, and accountability remain with the licensed architect regardless of the tools used. | How does an architect exercise responsible control over machine-assisted content, and what should be established before sealing? | Section 2.1 defines responsible control over every material machine-assisted contribution. Section 5.5 reconciles verification, recordkeeping, and disclosure. Section 6.2 carries those requirements to the seal, and Appendix E converts them into a pre-sealing decision. |
| NCARB, Model Law § 403 (2024) National Council of Architectural Registration Boards | An architect should maintain records adequate to demonstrate responsible control over original work and work produced by integrating the contributions of others. | What should a machine-assistance record contain, when should it be created, and how should it address aggregation, sampling, reverification, and retention? | Section 2.6 and §§ 5.1–5.4 define the record’s purpose, timing, content, aggregation rules, reverification triggers, and retention framework. Appendix D supplies the working record forms; Appendix A, §§ A.6–A.7, records the firm’s recordkeeping and retention arrangements. |
| NCEES, Model Law § 110.20(E) (2025) National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying | Responsible charge rests on professional knowledge and control, supported by identifiable professional responsibilities rather than nominal supervision. | How do professional knowledge and control operate when material content originates through a machine rather than another professional? | Section 2.1 translates knowledge and control into an architecture-specific rule for material machine-assisted contributions. Section 2.2 requires verification before reliance. Section 6.2 and Appendix E apply both requirements at sealing. |
| NCEES, Position Statement 6.10 (2025) National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying | Professionals should critically assess AI output, perform independent checks, and produce verifiable results supported by documented methodologies, data sources, and assumptions. | What constitutes an independent check, what makes its result verifiable, and what documentation should the project record preserve? | Section 2.2 defines the criterion-source-result test. Sections 5.2–5.3 and Appendix D establish the documentation required to demonstrate it. Part IV specifies the task controls; Appendix C records the project sources used in the check. |
| ICOR, Joint Statement (2026) Interorganizational Council on Regulation | Human responsibility and oversight cannot be automated, and the provenance of information should be tracked and documented. | How is provenance traced from a material assertion to its controlling authority, when is that chain required, and how is it preserved? | Section 2.3 calls for identifying material machine-assisted content and the sources used to verify it. Section 4.G determines when the control attaches; Appendix B records the task classification. Part V and Appendix D preserve the chain in the project record. |
| NSPE BER, Case 24-2 (2024) National Society of Professional Engineers, Board of Ethical Review | Responsible professional use of AI implicates verification before sealing, responsible charge, confidentiality, technical authority, and disclosure. | What makes verification comprehensive in the production and sealing of architectural instruments of service? | Sections 2.2 and 4.A–4.E establish the verification method and task controls; Appendix C records the governing project sources. Sections 2.3–2.5 integrate source identification, competence, and confidentiality. Appendix E carries the method through the final pre-sealing review. |
Authority and scope note. The sources differ in legal status, professional scope, and jurisdiction. The table identifies the foundation each source supplies and the additional operational method proposed by this Guide; it does not treat unlike sources as equivalent legal authority. Full citations and scope qualifications appear in § 8.4 and the Notes.