When AI becomes part of an application, a natural question comes up:
If AI influenced the outcome, who is actually responsible for the decision?
This question matters more than model choice or tooling, because it directly affects how systems are designed, tested, and trusted.
Decision Ownership Has Always Existed
In traditional systems, decision ownership is usually clear:
- Business rules decide eligibility
- Services enforce constraints
- Workflows control state transitions
- Databases protect consistency
Even in distributed systems, the system itself owns decisions.
Code executes rules, and responsibility is traceable.
AI changes how decisions are informed, not who owns them.
What AI Contributes — and What It Doesn’t
An AI component does not make decisions in the architectural sense.
It provides:
- Interpretations
- Classifications
- Recommendations
- Summaries
These outputs are inputs to a decision, not the decision itself.
Example
An AI labels a support ticket as “high priority.”
The system decides whether to escalate, notify, or auto-respond.
AI informs.
The system acts.
Why This Boundary Matters
When AI is treated as the decision-maker:
- Failures become hard to explain
- Responsibility becomes unclear
- Safety checks are easy to bypass
From an architectural standpoint, “the AI decided” is not a useful explanation.
Clear systems ensure that:
- Decisions are enforced by deterministic logic
- Constraints live outside the AI
- Outcomes remain attributable to the system
A Common Architectural Pattern
In practice, many AI-enabled systems follow this flow:
- AI evaluates context and produces a recommendation
- Deterministic logic validates constraints
- Workflows decide the next action
- Auditing records the outcome
This keeps authority where guarantees still exist.
AI contributes judgment, not authority.
AI Components vs Agentic Behavior
This distinction helps avoid confusion.
An AI component:
- Produces an output when invoked
- Has no control over next steps
- Operates within strict boundaries
An agentic system:
- Uses AI output to drive actions
- Orchestrates multiple steps
- Is deliberately designed to act autonomously
Agentic behavior is a system-level design choice.
Responsibility still belongs to the system — not the model.
Practical Implications for Developers
- Treat AI output as a recommendation, not a command
- Keep final decisions deterministic
- Add explicit checks for high-risk actions
- Avoid explanations that stop at “AI made the call”
These practices keep systems understandable even when reasoning is probabilistic.
A Simple Mental Model
Think of AI as a senior advisor.
It can:
- Surface patterns you might miss
- Provide strong suggestions
- Add useful context
But it does not approve decisions.
That responsibility remains with the system you design.
Closing Thought
AI can influence decisions, but it should not own them.
So, amongst State, Memory, and Context: What AI Actually “Remembers”?
Top comments (0)