EO 14434 is the superintelligence executive order: Executive Order 14434, "Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence," signed by President Trump on September 29, 2026. It tells federal agencies to use "Super Intelligence" and "SI" in place of "Artificial Intelligence" and "AI" in their communications and documents. It does not declare that superintelligent machines exist, and it does not change any law: for now, "Super Intelligence" legally means exactly what "artificial intelligence" already meant.
Status now (checked October 24, 2026): EO 14434 is in force as published in the Federal Register on October 2, 2026. The 60 day deadline for proposed legislative language on a federal "Super Intelligence" definition falls around November 28, 2026. We found no published proposal yet; the order sends it to the President and does not require it to be made public.
Below is a plain language walkthrough of what the order requires, what it leaves alone, what happens next, and how the government's "SI" differs from what researchers mean by superintelligence.
What EO 14434 says
The text of the order is short. Its key provisions:
- A naming policy. "To the maximum extent permitted by law," the executive branch "shall use the terms 'Super Intelligence' and 'SI' in place of 'Artificial Intelligence' and 'AI' and will not acknowledge the usage of 'Artificial Intelligence' and 'AI' in any applicable setting."
- Where it applies. Agencies must make the swap in "official correspondence, public communications, websites, reports, policy documents, and other nonstatutory documents within the executive branch."
- No rewriting of the past. Nothing requires changes to "previously issued regulations, Presidential actions, contracts, grants, or other historical documents."
- A borrowed definition. "Super Intelligence" and "SI" mean the technologies covered by the existing statutory definition of artificial intelligence in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3), which describes "a machine based system that can, for a given set of human defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations or decisions influencing real or virtual environments." Our explainer on what SI means covers the definition in more detail.
- A 60 day task. The Assistant to the President for Science and Technology must send the President proposed legislative language for a federal definition of "Super Intelligence."
The order also says it creates no enforceable rights, and that the Office of Science and Technology Policy bears the cost of publishing it. It appeared in the Federal Register on October 2, 2026, as document 2026-20321 at 91 FR 63129.
What the order does and does not change
| Question | Answer under EO 14434 |
|---|---|
| Do federal agencies have to say "SI" instead of "AI"? | Yes, in communications and nonstatutory documents, to the extent the law allows |
| Does it change existing laws or regulations? | No |
| Does it change existing contracts or grants? | No |
| Does it apply to private companies? | No, it is directed at the executive branch |
| Does "SI" mean a new, more powerful kind of system? | Not yet; it uses the existing statutory AI definition |
| Could the definition change? | Possibly, if Congress adopts new legislation |
To say that without the table: agencies must change their wording going forward, but laws, regulations, contracts and grants stay as they are, companies are not covered, and "SI" is legally the same thing as "AI" unless Congress acts.
Why the White House says it made the change
The order argues that today's systems "far exceed what was envisioned when the term 'Artificial Intelligence' first came into use" and "do much more than imitate or automate discrete aspects of human intelligence." The White House fact sheet says the name "conveys the true capabilities of the technologies being developed today."
The fact sheet places the order alongside earlier moves: more than $5 billion announced for the Genesis Mission, the July 2025 AI Action Plan with more than 90 federal actions, and a National Super Intelligence Policy Framework unveiled in March 2026, which appears to be the March 20, 2026 National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence explained in our National AI Policy Framework guide. Notably, the fact sheet itself now uses "SI" when describing the earlier AI Action Plan.
Deadlines in EO 14434
The main deadline is the 60 day report. Counting from September 29, the proposed legislative language is due around November 28, 2026. The order says it must cover three things:
- Whether and how far a "Super Intelligence" definition should "modify, expand upon, or otherwise supersede" the existing statutory definition of artificial intelligence.
- Any conforming amendments to existing laws that mention "artificial intelligence" and "AI."
- Any further presidential or executive action needed to apply the new definition.
Legal commentators, including Wiley in a note republished on JD Supra, point out that the practical impact depends on whether Congress takes up that language. Until then, laws and contracts that say "artificial intelligence" keep their meaning.
Government "SI" vs research superintelligence
This is where most confusion comes from. In AI research, superintelligence usually means something far beyond today's systems. Philosopher Nick Bostrom, whose 2014 book Superintelligence popularized the term, described it as an intellect that greatly exceeds human cognitive performance in virtually all domains of interest.
| Item | Executive order "SI" | Research "superintelligence" |
|---|---|---|
| What it refers to | Any system covered by the statutory AI definition, including today's chatbots | Hypothetical systems far smarter than humans across almost all domains |
| Does it exist? | Yes, by definition | Not by most experts' accounts |
| Main purpose of the term | Government branding and policy focus | Analyzing capability and risk |
Organizations that study risks from smarter than human AI, such as MIRI and the Center for AI Safety, use the research meaning. Government safety testers such as the UK AI Security Institute still use "AI." So when you read "SI" in a US federal document, read it as "AI"; when you read "superintelligence" in a lab's safety paper or a researcher's essay, it usually means the far more advanced, hypothetical kind.
For where today's models actually stand, see our explainer on whether AGI has been achieved.
How companies and labs are reacting
On the day of the order, the White House also had technology company leaders sign a separate, voluntary "White House Accord on Super Intelligence," which asks frontier developers for internal controls, monitoring, independent external assessments and board oversight. Law firm Freshfields notes that the accord creates no legally enforceable obligations.
The most visible industry echo so far comes from Elon Musk. SpaceX, which acquired xAI in February 2026, rebranded the lab as SpaceXAI in July, Engadget reported, and Elon Musk later said it would be renamed SpaceXSI, according to The Next Web. By October 2026 the company's own site was publishing under the SpaceXSI name, for example on its X Subscription announcement. That lab makes Grok; the order itself does not require any company, including OpenAI with ChatGPT, to change its product names or wording.
Meanwhile, frontier labs are debating real limits on capability growth. Anthropic's Dario Amodei has called on the industry to pace the frontier, and labs gate releases through safety policies compared in our Preparedness Framework vs Responsible Scaling Policy guide.
Pros and cons of the renaming
Arguments in favor
- Signals that the government sees the technology as transformative and a national priority.
- Costs little, since it does not rewrite existing documents.
- Keeps legal continuity by borrowing the existing statutory definition for now.
Arguments against
- Risks confusing the public by using a term researchers reserve for far more capable systems.
- Creates two vocabularies, since laws, contracts and other governments still say "AI."
- Could make federal documents harder to search alongside older "AI" material.
Who this matters to
- Federal contractors and grant recipients: existing contracts and grants are unaffected, but expect new solicitations and agency communications to say "SI."
- Researchers and journalists: search for both terms when looking for federal documents published after September 29, 2026. Our SI timeline lists the key federal AI documents by date.
- Businesses and agencies: our SI vs AI guide has a practical checklist.
- Everyone else: the tools you use have not changed. The order is about wording, not about a new kind of technology.
FAQ
What is EO 14434?
EO 14434 is the official number of the superintelligence executive order, titled "Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence." It was signed on September 29, 2026 and published in the Federal Register on October 2, 2026 as document 2026-20321 at 91 FR 63129. It renames AI as "SI" in executive branch communications and leaves the law unchanged. Related reading: our Genesis Mission explainer.
Does the order mean superintelligence exists?
No. The order defines "Super Intelligence" using the existing legal definition of artificial intelligence, so it covers the same systems as before. It does not claim that machines now exceed humans across the board.
Where can I read the full text of EO 14434?
The official text is on the Federal Register (91 FR 63129, pages 63129 to 63130) and on the White House website. The American Presidency Project also keeps a copy.
Do private companies have to say SI instead of AI?
No. It applies to the executive branch. Companies can keep saying AI, although at least one has moved that way: the lab behind Grok, formerly SpaceXAI, now publishes under the name SpaceXSI.
Does it change any laws or contracts?
No. The order says it does not require changing previously issued regulations, presidential actions, contracts, grants or historical documents, and it creates no enforceable rights.
When will there be a new legal definition of SI?
The order gives the President's science and technology adviser 60 days, until around November 28, 2026, to propose legislative language. Any new legal definition would then need an Act of Congress.
