Separate lifecycle states, aliases, ownership, geography and connection evidence.
Infrastructure evidence + place intelligence
See the project, system, place and promise together.
One source-linked view of project facts, commitments, local effects, material changes and unresolved evidence.
Start with your accountability
Choose the decision view.
Source, date, confidence, freshness and review due for material fields.
Basis, qualifier, responsible party, milestone, delivery and dispute.
Decision, recommendation, options, owner, due date and evidence confidence.
Expert review completed
19 reviews. 30 findings. 27 resolved.
Three matters are mitigated at interface level and remain dependent on technical or rights-holder authority.
Highest-value workflow
Portfolio assurance
Start with the decision and the matters requiring attention, then trace each item to project fields, sources, commitments and accountable actions.
Decision control
What requires decision or escalation now?
- Recommended action
- Accountable owner
- Due
- Evidence confidence
- Rights-holder gate
Controlled register
Project lifecycle and provenance
| Project | Planning | Connection | Construction | Operation | Network | Next milestone | Freshness |
|---|
Since last review
Material change register
Core commercial moat
Commitments and delivery
Turn required conditions, formal statements, project publications and external evidence into an auditable ledger without converting aspiration into obligation.
Publication control A source can establish that a statement was made. Delivery requires separate evidence, review and—where relevant—rights-holder or affected-party authority.
Host-region decision layer
Regional readiness
Assess cumulative projects, benefits, pressures and distributional effects over time—not one announcement at a time.
Accountability
Regional action plan
| Action | Owner | Due | Evidence needed | Status |
|---|
Method boundary Pressure levels are structured expert prompts derived from the static seed. They are not validated economic, housing, traffic or service-capacity forecasts.
ProjectTrunk / shared evidence foundation
Projects
One record links identity, separate lifecycle states, place, network evidence, field provenance, commitments and private governance status.
DataTrunk + assurance workflow
Evidence review
Review conflicts, stale fields, changed wording and missing delivery evidence before they affect a decision.
Session audit
Review decision log
No reviewer decisions recorded in this browser session.
Executive output
Decision briefs
Lead with the decision, recommendation, options, evidence confidence and accountable next action.
Brief preview
Select a project and generate the brief.
10–12 week paid design partnership
Pilot setup
Define one bounded evidence-assurance pilot with explicit operational, security, governance and measurement accountabilities.
Standard pilot hypothesis
- Scope
- Up to 20 project/stage records and 50 public sources
- Users
- Five named users
- Outputs
- Controlled register, commitment ledger, exceptions, monthly digest and workshop
- Indicative fee
- A$25,000 excluding GST, subject to contract
Before/after measurement
- Baseline the same recurring task across three prior cycles.
- Record time, rework, unresolved conflict and delay.
- Repeat at pilot midpoint and close.
- Verify at least one decision-relevant change, risk or action.
- Make a documented conversion decision.
Pilot charter preview
Complete the form to generate a charter.
Specialist hand-offs
Eight trunks. One evidence record.
Readiness, permitted use, required hand-off and unavailable capability remain visible for every specialist module.
FlowTrunk + NetworkTrunk
Validated technical hand-off checklist
Base case, study year, topology, demand and generation assumptions.
Network level, owner, node, MW, firmness, redundancy and timing.
Model owner, software, version, run ID, contingencies and validation.
Timestamp, limits, convention, caveats, reviewer and sign-off.
Current state This beta does not run load flow, contingencies or connection assessment.
MapTrunk / corridor gateway
Corridor screening gate
HOLDComplete all five checks before progressing beyond desktop screening.
Independent expert-persona review
19 domain reviews. 30 consolidated findings.
Each established agent completed a persona-specific task, recorded a qualitative judgment and then contributed to a cross-reviewed remediation cycle.
Review boundary The product owner directed the established agents to act as independent expert personas. This is substantive simulated expert review, not external professional certification or evidence that named human individuals participated.
Treatment
Consolidated findings
Still open