The short version
Executive Order 14434, signed September 29, 2026 and published in the Federal Register on October 2, directs federal executive agencies to say “Super Intelligence” and “SI” where they previously said “Artificial Intelligence” and “AI” in official communications. It is a vocabulary instruction for one branch of one government. It does not rename the technology worldwide, and it does not show that any system has become superintelligent.
What reason does the order give?
This page sticks to the rationale the order states in writing. We do not speculate about motives that the document does not express.
Section 1, titled “Purpose,” argues that today’s technologies “far exceed what was envisioned” when the term artificial intelligence first came into use. It then states that “the terminology used by the Federal Government should reflect the transformative capabilities of these technologies,” and that “Super Intelligence” “more appropriately captures the promise, potential, and rapidly advancing capabilities of these technologies.”
In other words, the stated reason is about framing: the order holds that the older name undersells the technology. That is a policy judgment expressed by the order, not a scientific measurement. You can read the full order on the White House website or the official Federal Register record on GovInfo.
Who has to use the new term?
Section 2 directs executive departments and agencies, “to the maximum extent permitted by law,” to use SI in official correspondence, public communications, websites, reports, policy documents, and other non-statutory documents within the executive branch.
That scope leaves a great deal outside it. Private companies, universities, researchers, journalists, state governments, other countries, and everyday users are not directed by the order to change their vocabulary. If you keep saying AI, nothing in the order prohibits that.
What does and does not legally change?
Section 2 also says nothing in it requires altering previously issued regulations, Presidential actions, contracts, grants, or other historical documents. Older records can keep saying AI.
Section 3 defines SI, for purposes of the order and except where otherwise provided by law, as the technologies and systems covered by the existing statutory definition of artificial intelligence in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3). So the legal category stays the same; only the label used in covered communications changes. The order also asks for proposed legislative language within 60 days. A request for a proposal is not a new law, and as of October 9, 2026, no new statutory definition has been enacted.
How have federal agencies responded?
One visible example, as of October 9, 2026: the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) posted a notice about “Super Intelligence” on its Computer Security Resource Center, created October 5, 2026. It says NIST is working to update its communications, including that website, to incorporate the term as directed by the order, and it reproduces the text of Section 2.
Adoption is likely to be gradual and uneven, since the order applies to a large number of agencies and documents. A single notice tells you an agency is responding; it does not tell you how far every agency has progressed.
Does this mean we have achieved superintelligence?
No. Renaming a category does not demonstrate a technical capability. In research, artificial superintelligence (ASI) generally describes a hypothetical system that exceeds human capability across broad domains. Whether any system meets that bar is a question of evidence: careful testing, clear definitions, and honest reporting of limitations.
The order’s own definition ties SI to the same statutory category already called AI. A chatbot, a summarization tool, or an image generator works exactly as it did on September 28. It can still make mistakes, and its outputs still need checking.
How to read SI from here
When you see SI in a federal document, read it as the government’s term for what most people still call AI. When you see “superintelligence” in a research paper, the author probably means a hypothetical capability level. For more context, see our beginner’s guide to what SI means, the side-by-side comparison of AI, SI, and ASI, or PolitiFact’s secondary explainer. If you are ready to try a tool yourself, our getting started guide suggests a low-stakes first task.