Instrument theme
Financial services

Fraud and AML triage.
Analyst capacity back.

Nearly every financial institution already detects more than it can investigate. The constraint is not the model that raises alerts — it is the analyst capacity behind it, and that is where an AI system actually earns its place.

THE REAL BOTTLENECK

Transaction monitoring systems are typically tuned conservatively, because the regulatory consequence of missing a suspicious activity report is severe and the consequence of raising a false one is merely expensive. It is widely reported across the industry that the overwhelming majority of alerts close as no further action, and each one has consumed analyst time to get there.

So the valuable intervention is rarely a better detection model. It is compressing the investigation. An analyst opening an alert spends most of their time assembling context that already exists somewhere — prior alerts on the same party, KYC file, transaction history, adverse media, related accounts — before making a judgement that is often quick once the picture is complete.

That assembly is what we automate. The agent gathers the evidence, structures it against your institution's own typologies, and presents a case file with every element linked to its source. The decision stays with the analyst, and the time to reach it falls substantially.

WHAT WE BUILD
ALERT TRIAGE PATH
  1. Alert
    from your monitoring system
  2. Assemble
    KYC · history · prior alerts
  3. Screen
    sanctions · adverse media
  4. Structure
    against your typologies
  5. Analyst decision
    human, always
  6. SAR drafting support
    analyst-reviewed
Solid: evidence assembly Dashed: drafting support, never submission
The system assembles and structures. It does not close alerts, and it does not file reports.
WHAT DECIDES WHETHER IT WORKS

The model never closes an alert. Auto-closure is where these projects go wrong with a regulator, and it is not a capability question — it is an accountability one. A named human disposes of every alert. The system changes how long that takes and how good the information in front of them is.

Every element is traceable. A case file assembled by an AI system has to show, per element, which record it came from. An examiner will ask, and “the model determined” is not an answer that survives the follow-up question.

Model risk management applies. If your institution operates under a model risk framework, this system is in scope: documented, validated, monitored and periodically reviewed. Building it as though that will be added later is how a pilot fails to reach production.

Measure investigation time, not detection. The success metric is time to disposition and consistency of outcome across analysts, not the alert volume — which the AI system does not change and should not be credited for.

QUESTIONS
QUESTIONS — 4

Not directly, and we would rather be clear about that. False positives come from your monitoring rules, which we do not replace. What changes is the cost of processing them. If reducing alert volume is the goal, that is a rules-tuning engagement with a model risk process attached, and a different piece of work.

It can assemble a draft from the evidence, which analysts generally find useful. The analyst writes, reviews and files — the narrative in a report is a professional judgement with a name attached and should stay that way.

Fraud detection is carved out of the EU AI Act’s high-risk credit category, but the EU anti-money-laundering package and GDPR still apply in full — including the Article 6 and Article 10 basis and the retention position for adverse-media screening of individuals, which is the part most often left undefined. Scope is for your compliance function to set; we build to it. This is not legal advice.

Wherever your risk position requires. Financial crime data is among the strongest reasons to choose on-premise or private data centre hosting, and an open-weight model self-hosted handles this workload well. The system does not need a frontier API.

Keep reading
30-minute technical call · no deck

Compress the
investigation.

The alert volume is not the problem. The hours behind each one are.

CASE STUDIES

Shipped work.
Go and check it.

The work we can name, with the live site, our scope and the boundary made explicit. Select a project to see the evidence; each is a full case study, not a logo or a claim.

sonora.com
The Sonora homepage on desktop: a full-bleed dune landscape behind the headline “Transform Your Life with Sound”, with App Store and Google Play download buttons.
sonora.com — homepage, 1440×900 sonora.com →
Live Consumer wellness · Mobile + web

Sonora

Cognitive AI Ltd · 2026

A free sound-wellness app, described by its publisher as AI sound therapy that reads a short vocal sample at the start of a session and generates a soundscape for that moment. We designed and built the website and its backend, produced assets for the iOS and Android apps, and supported the application prototype.

Read the case study →

See every published project →

WHO WE HAVE BUILT FOR

Twenty-one years of applications, platforms and campaigns for names you know.

See all of our work →