SynthianAI · Five-Day Decision Diagnostic
A fixed-scope diagnostic for one AI, data, software, governance, or cross-functional initiative with conflicting requirements, incomplete evidence, hidden dependencies, unresolved risk, or unclear decision ownership.
Prefer a direct note? contact@synthianai.tech
Fit and boundaries
The diagnostic is designed for a consequential decision whose evidence, ownership, requirements, and risks are not yet aligned. It makes unresolved structure visible before additional work compounds it.
Good fit
Not a fit
What you receive
The work separates what is known from what is assumed, then makes contradictions, dependencies, risks, and decision ownership explicit.
Where requirements, incentives, evidence, or responsibilities cannot all be satisfied as currently stated.
A claim-by-claim separation of supplied evidence, operative assumptions, failure exposure, and unresolved questions.
The hidden decisions that must occur first, who owns them, and what can safely remain reversible.
A concise statement of the decision, viable paths, current constraints, and recommended next gate.
A bounded sequence for testing, stopping, revising, or advancing without pretending uncertainty has vanished.
One 45-minute briefing and one written factual-correction round limited to the originally supplied inputs.
Five-day scope
The five-business-day clock begins only after kickoff, cleared kickoff payment, and receipt of every agreed input. If inputs are incomplete, the delivery clock has not started.
The scope is locked around one consequential decision rather than an entire transformation program.
We define the decision boundary, supplied evidence, stakeholders represented, and failure conditions.
Or an agreed equivalent, with up to four stakeholder perspectives represented in supplied material.
Questions are grouped during analysis to preserve momentum and keep the scope controlled.
One 45-minute delivery briefing, followed by one written factual-correction round requested within three business days.
Inspectable format
This accessible overview mirrors the downloadable one-page PDF so the method can be evaluated without mistaking a format demonstration for client evidence.
Preview Sample - Format Demonstration Only. This is not a client engagement, testimonial, case study, or reported result. No client or confidential data was used. Every organization, fact, metric, risk, owner, and recommendation is illustrative and was created solely to demonstrate the diagnostic format and method.
Decision under review: An illustrative professional-services firm is considering a 30-day pilot of an AI-assisted proposal-and-delivery intake workflow. Leadership wants faster qualification and handoff. Delivery, security, and legal stakeholders have not yet agreed on the data boundary, review standard, or ownership of AI-assisted output.
The stated speed target depends on mandatory human review that has not been measured, assigned, or connected to an accepted output standard.
Decision gate: name the accountable reviewer and define the review standard before pilot use.
Restricted material entering the workflow belongs jointly to Security and Legal. Human approval state belongs to the Delivery lead. Correction ownership belongs to Operations. Comparison integrity belongs to the executive sponsor.
Approve a shadow-mode pilot only, contingent on three gates: an approved data boundary, a named human decision owner, and a written output acceptance test. During shadow mode, the workflow may analyze synthetic or explicitly permitted inputs, but it may not issue client-facing material or make delivery commitments.
Confirm scope, permitted inputs, decision owners, and failure conditions.
Configure the shadow workflow and build the manual comparison set.
Run bounded cases with human review and exception logging.
Compare usefulness, error modes, review effort, and unresolved risks.
Decide whether to stop, revise, or advance to a separately governed pilot.
Selected public research
SynthianAI had 22 open Zenodo records as of August 14, 2026. These publications demonstrate method and public accountability; they are not prior consulting performance or proof of commercial outcomes.
AI ethics and subject-risk
Open Zenodo working paper presenting an ethical and precautionary analysis of unresolved subject-risk; it does not establish that any particular AI is sentient or validate the proposed safeguards.
Andre L. McCormick · May 3, 2026 · Working paper · CC BY 4.0
View DOI recordGenerative Paradox and analytical method
Open Zenodo publication developing a scoped structural and methodological argument through Generative Paradox; its universal formal witness remains incomplete, and the argument does not establish FRDF physics.
Andre L. McCormick · August 7, 2026 · Publication · CC BY 4.0
View DOI recordComplex systems and FRDF modeling
Open Zenodo working paper presenting a proposed FRDF complex-systems model and candidate observational pathways; the general physical theory remains speculative and empirically unvalidated.
Andre L. McCormick et al. · August 9, 2025 · Working paper · CC BY 4.0
View DOI recordWorking boundaries
The public language states the operating boundary. Detailed license and commercial terms belong in the written scope and remain subject to legal review.
White-label delivery is available by agreement for the client-specific final deliverable. The consulting partner retains the client relationship.
White-label permission does not transfer SynthianAI background intellectual property or permit resale of the underlying methods or templates as a standalone product.
SynthianAI retains its pre-existing research, methods, templates, taxonomies, tools, and generalized know-how. The scoped client deliverable may be used for the agreed engagement; detailed license terms are set in the written scope.
Contract-level language remains subject to legal review. Scope changes are separately priced.
Questions before inquiry
No. It separates evidence, assumptions, contradictions, dependencies, risks, and ownership so accountable people can make a better-defined decision. It does not transfer responsibility to SynthianAI or an AI system.
No. The diagnostic may identify an unresolved compliance or security dependency, but it does not provide legal advice, security assurance, or compliance certification.
Send a plain-language description of the decision, why it matters now, and the roles involved. Do not attach confidential, classified, export-controlled, regulated, or sensitive personal information until a written scope and safe exchange method are agreed.
New evidence, stakeholders, or initiatives introduced after scope lock are documented and separately priced rather than silently absorbed into the original five-day commitment.
One decision. Five business days.
Describe the decision in plain language. We will determine whether it fits the bounded diagnostic before asking for sensitive material.