ENTERPRISE PILOT
Configure Epistemis for your decision space.
Epistemis is decision-state infrastructure for liability-exposed enterprise decisions. Their basis at the time of decision may later need to be reviewed, challenged or defended by authorized reviewers.
The Enterprise Pilot configures Epistemis for one clearly bounded decision space in your organization. Together, we define authoritative sources, evidence, requirements, roles and views for later readers.
A controlled case shows which requirements are satisfied and what must still be resolved before the state can be recorded as final. Every Epistemis deployment begins with an Enterprise Pilot.
Discuss your decision spaceTHE DECISION SPACE
Which decision does the pilot start with?
A Decision Space is the bounded context for a decision, including its sources, rules, evidence, roles and permitted reader views. It also defines conditions that prevent a final record: the blockers.
Illustrative scope
Not the organization’s entire AI governance, but the approval of one model version for a specific enterprise process.
The pilot needs four foundations:
A specific decision
The decision and its boundaries can be clearly defined.
An accountable sponsor
An accountable person within the organization can involve the necessary subject-matter and approval roles.
Authoritative sources
Relevant systems or records can be identified, and access can be defined for the pilot.
A plausible later review
It is clear who may later review, challenge or use the original decision basis to defend the decision.
Not all evidence needs to be available for the first conversation. Missing foundations are clarified, not assumed to exist.
WORKING TOGETHER
A shared core. Your specific decision context.
STANDARDIZED CORE
Epistemis provides
Epistemis provides the standardized core for evidence checks and final records, together with the implementation method. Defined requirements are checked reproducibly; states recorded as final are not subsequently overwritten.
ENTERPRISE-SPECIFIC CONFIGURATION
Your organization contributes
Your organization contributes the decision mandate, its authoritative sources and the requirements being applied. The designated people remain accountable for subject-matter determinations and required approvals.
CONFIGURED DECISION SPACE
Together, we establish
The shared configuration defines what is checked for this case, what blocks a final record and who may see which information.
Participants are those responsible for the decision, requirements, sources, approvals and later reader views. Depending on the case, this may include the business function, Legal, Compliance, Risk and IT or data owners. The specific people involved depend on the decision space.
WORK AND OUTPUTS
What is established — and what does each phase produce?
Eight phases build on one another, from defining the scope to determining the deployment path. The nine outputs are shown alongside the work that produces them.
Define the decision space
We define which decision is in scope, which variants are included and which adjacent questions remain outside the pilot.
Documented decision-space definition.
Define the requirements
The responsible specialists identify the relevant regulatory requirements and internal rules, including the versions being applied. Together, we translate them into explicit, evaluable requirements, including thresholds and escalation rules.
Requirement map covering rules, duties, thresholds and escalation.
Define sources and access
We establish which systems and records are authoritative for each type of evidence. We define connections, permitted access and processing boundaries. Source systems retain authority over their own records.
Record of authoritative sources, connector boundaries and access limits.
Define evidence and finalization requirements
We define the evidence required, its necessary quality and currency, and which gaps block a final record. Documented residual uncertainty remains distinguishable from missing mandatory requirements.
Evidence requirement model with defined finalization conditions.
Assign roles and approval authority
We define who prepares, reviews and approves. Required separation of duties and human oversight are assigned within the decision space.
Role and approval authority model.
Configure views for later readers
We define which information an authorized reader may see for a specific review purpose. This includes deciding which content is omitted or redacted.
This role- and purpose-bound view of the governed decision state is an Evidence Pack. It is not one identical document for every reader.
Configured Evidence Pack views with disclosure and redaction rules.
Run a controlled decision case
We apply the configuration to one real or realistic decision case.
SIMULATION explores gaps, alternatives and uncertainty. BRIDGE checks which results meet the defined transfer requirements and carries only those results from SIMULATION into SEAL review. Only SEAL can record the state as final within Epistemis when the finalization conditions are met.
A missing mandatory requirement keeps the relevant transition or final record blocked.
Result of the controlled decision-case run.
Blocker and gap register.
Define the deployment path
We establish which parts of the configuration can be reused and what further use or expansion requires. Responsibilities and operating conditions are defined explicitly.
Deployment path with operating and expansion conditions.
POSSIBLE OUTCOMES
What does the case show — and what happens next?
The reviewed state of the case and the decision about further deployment are two different questions. The following outcomes make both visible.
Outcome: PROCEED
A case recorded as final
The defined finalization conditions were satisfied, and SEAL recorded the decision state as final.
Reuse and operating conditions are defined for further use. A SEAL alone does not authorize deployment in additional decision spaces.
Outcome: BLOCKED
Required evidence is missing
Required evidence is missing or does not meet the defined quality or currency requirements. A final record remains blocked.
The gap register shows what must be supplied before another review.
Outcome: UNRESOLVED
Responsibilities remain unresolved
Required approval authority, separation of duties or oversight responsibilities have not been defined unambiguously.
These responsibilities must be clarified before the affected step can continue.
Outcome: RECONFIGURE
Narrow the decision space
The chosen decision space is too broad for the intended pilot.
The scope and configuration are revised, and the case is then reviewed again.
Outcome: EXTEND
Consider additional decision spaces
The tested configuration may provide a basis for additional liability-exposed enterprise decision spaces.
Additional sources, requirements and roles are defined. The expanded configuration is reviewed separately.
Outcome: NO DEPLOYMENT
Conclude without deployment
The decision space proves unsuitable. The reasons are documented, and the pilot concludes without deployment.
The organization retains the decision-space definition, evidence model and gap register already produced.
THE BASIS FOR WORKING TOGETHER
What is agreed before work begins?
Scope, participants and expected outputs are agreed before work begins. Source access, permitted processing and confidentiality are established before sensitive information is used.
Does the pilot commit us to deployment?
No. Whether use continues, and under which conditions, is decided separately on the basis of the results.
What does a SEAL establish?
A SEAL states that the configured finalization conditions were satisfied at that time. It does not grant legal permission or guarantee compliance or insurance coverage. Acceptance by courts, regulators or other reviewers is not guaranteed.
YOUR DECISION SPACE
Which liability-exposed decision space would you like to discuss?
Describe the decision, the accountable role and the possible later review. General information is enough for the first conversation.
Please do not submit confidential, personal or legally privileged information.
Discuss your decision space