Enterprise Ai Buyers
For the enterprise ai buyers team that needs independent sources before an actual spending, legal or operating decision.
Review scope →Specialist divisions / AI Governance, Model Risk & Evidence Assurance
Specialist evidence services
AI Governance, Model Risk & Evidence Assurance
Can vendor AI assertions be traced to evidence that supports the buyer's decision?
Who commissions this work
Risk Committees
For the risk committees team that needs independent sources before an actual spending, legal or operating decision.
Review scope →Ai Procurement
For the ai procurement team that needs independent sources before an actual spending, legal or operating decision.
Review scope →The real purchase trigger
AI procurement, public performance claim, model release or new AI policy
Audit claim-to-source traceability, identify counterexamples and document information gaps.
We make the client’s claim, the original record, conflicting sources and the unknowns readable before commitment.
Choose one of eight defined services
AI Vendor Claims & Evidence Audit
One named subject or event; up to three material claims; agreed source jurisdictions and date window. Deliverable: Source coverage sheet, first three contradictions or gaps, clear next-record requests.
Review service and acceptance →Identity decision · Identity & Source Map
One main entity or asset and up to four related names, owners, locations, records or aliases. Deliverable: Entity or asset-resolution table, link-confidence explanation and original source chain.
Review service and acceptance →Claim decision · Material Claims Verification
Up to five numbered claims from a supplied proposal, transaction pack or public statement. Deliverable: Claim-by-claim citations, opposite sources, date-sensitive uncertainty and unproved statements.
Review service and acceptance →Timing decision · Independent Chronology Reconstruction
One bounded event sequence; disclosed evidence window; source provenance and known omissions. Deliverable: Chronology chart, disputed-event table, original-record references and unresolved sequence.
Review service and acceptance →Counterparty decision · Counterparty & Relationship Check
Named entity and up to five related organisations or responsible entities identified from lawful records. Deliverable: Evidence-supported relationship diagram, mismatches, ownership questions and exposure caveats.
Review service and acceptance →Decision-pack review · Decision-Ready Evidence Dossier
One defined commercial decision, six critical questions, specified sources and no unlimited investigation. Deliverable: Executive decision memo, evidence/contradiction matrix, dated primary-source index and recommendations for further questions.
Review service and acceptance →Repeat-work pilot · Repeat-File Evidence Desk
Written pilot of up to ten defined file types, with sampling rules, turnaround assumptions and exclusions. Deliverable: Consistent file-by-file evidence cards, exception register and consolidated management view.
Review service and acceptance →AI Claims & Governance Watch
One named subject or a written small watchlist; specified public records, cadence, escalation threshold. Deliverable: Dated change log, evidence citations, false-positive dispositions and monthly change summary.
Review service and acceptance →Eight focused specialist pathways
Each pathway has a narrower research question, decision-ready evidence specification, source scope and written-commissioning path.
AI Vendor Claims Verification
Test the exact source and contrary evidence behind ai vendor claims verification, rather than commission a generic industry report.
Review scope →AI Model Documentation Review
Test the exact source and contrary evidence behind ai model documentation review, rather than commission a generic industry report.
Review scope →AI Research & Citation Assurance
Test the exact source and contrary evidence behind ai research & citation assurance, rather than commission a generic industry report.
Review scope →AI Governance Evidence Mapping
Test the exact source and contrary evidence behind ai governance evidence mapping, rather than commission a generic industry report.
Review scope →Algorithmic Decision Evidence Review
Test the exact source and contrary evidence behind algorithmic decision evidence review, rather than commission a generic industry report.
Review scope →AI Regulatory Intelligence
Test the exact source and contrary evidence behind ai regulatory intelligence, rather than commission a generic industry report.
Review scope →Synthetic Media Provenance Research
Test the exact source and contrary evidence behind synthetic media provenance research, rather than commission a generic industry report.
Review scope →Independent AI Output Challenge
Test the exact source and contrary evidence behind independent ai output challenge, rather than commission a generic industry report.
Review scope →Research sources to test
The following sources may support this type of work; their existence is not a claim that a prospective client or named matter has been verified.
NIST AI risk management framework
Source to test against the actual claim, checked for effective dates, coverage and access limitations. Not a client-specific verification result.
Open source →NIST generative AI profile
Source to test against the actual claim, checked for effective dates, coverage and access limitations. Not a client-specific verification result.
Open source →European Union AI Act implementation
Source to test against the actual claim, checked for effective dates, coverage and access limitations. Not a client-specific verification result.
Open source →Evidence deliverables and professional limits
What the decision owner receives
- AI Vendor Claims & Evidence Audit
- claim-to-test map
- documentary gap register
- vendor clarification pack
- Source-linked claim analysis
- Dated assumptions, contradictions and missing evidence
What remains outside the mandate
No AI certification, conformance assessment, penetration testing or blanket accuracy guarantee.
Acceptance is conditional on conflict, jurisdiction, lawful access, data protection, capacity and written fee approval.
Start with the decision, not a large retainer
Buyer stages
Match the size of the assignment to the present decision.
Review scope →Example evidence pack
View the contents of an illustrative research output without invented findings.
Review scope →Fees & engagement
Understand written standard-fee proposals, pilot limits and the approval process.
Review scope →Current sector source anchors and buyer decision kits
Review which original government or institutional records can inform the decision, which claims are still unknown, and which bounded product fits first.
Evidence questions worth resolving
Decision questions
- Which exact AI system/version and deployment context is claimed?
- What reproducible, lawfully accessible evidence substantiates the stated capability?
- What gaps, counterexamples and out-of-scope high-risk assessments remain?
Contrary-evidence tests
Division evidence guide (PDF)
Change-monitoring method (PDF)Lawful-source coverage varies. The documents explain the proposed method; no case, professional certification, continuous watch or fee has been approved automatically.