Practical answers, grounded in pilot stage.

No. Workflow tools track that a task moved from one step to another. TraceLogic governs the decision itself: evidence, policy version, reviewer, approval, controlled execution, and replay. The two can coexist; they solve different problems.

No. TraceLogic is designed around human-in-the-loop control. Review, approval, and execution responsibility remain with the people in the lifecycle. The platform makes those steps clearer, not absent.

TraceLogic uses AI-assisted intake to help structure documents and case inputs. Decision checks are deterministic, not generative. AI is used to assist intake, not to replace policy evaluation or human review.

No. Approval and execution are explicit, role-separated steps in the lifecycle. The platform does not approve or execute regulated decisions on its own.

When a case needs to depart from the policy-recommended path, the override is recorded as a deliberate, named act. The override request must carry a reason code from a closed vocabulary, a written rationale, a supporting evidence reference, and a risk acknowledgement. Separation of duties is enforced: the user who submitted the case cannot also approve the override on the same case. Every override decision is written into the sealed decision artifact and is visible during replay, so an auditor can see what was overridden, by whom, why, and against what evidence. Multi-step co-sign workflows beyond this are on the roadmap.

TraceLogic is designed to support governed AI and agentic workflows as the product evolves. Today, the pilot focuses on AI-assisted regulated decisions: evidence, policy checks, human review, controlled override, sealed records, controlled execution, and audit replay. Agents must not silently approve, override, execute, or close consequential decisions. The operating principle is: AI-assisted recommendations, governance checks, humans approve, TraceLogic records and replays the decision.

Synthetic or approved test data only. No real customer data, no real bank or vendor branding, no certification marks. Real data use would only be considered as part of a scoped pilot engagement, with handling agreed in writing first.

No. TraceLogic is currently in pilot stage and is not claiming ISO 42001, ISO 27001, SOC 2, regulatory approval, full audit readiness, or guaranteed compliance. Security validation is in active development, not a finished posture.

No. Mortgage forbearance is the flagship pilot use case because it is regulator-watched, evidence-heavy, and reviewable. The same governance model applies to other regulated decision types: insurance claims, credit exceptions, regulated product approvals, AI-assisted decision oversight, and others.

Yes, in principle. The lifecycle (intake, policy check, review, approval, controlled execution, replay) is decision-type-agnostic. Extending to a new decision type is part of pilot scoping, not assumed by default.

Case management tracks the case as it moves through people. TraceLogic governs the decision itself: it captures evidence, policy version, rule path, approval, and execution control into a single sealed artifact that can be replayed later. Case management can sit alongside TraceLogic; the two answer different questions.

Replay uses stored evidence only. The frozen decision artifact contains the source documents, intake values, policy version, decision output, reviewer identity, approval status, and execution record. Replay reconstructs the decision from this artifact alone, without relying on live systems or current state.

An immutable record of a single governed decision. It contains the evidence used, the policy version applied, the decision output, the reviewer identity, the approval status, and the execution record. Once sealed, it is the basis for replay and for audit reconstruction.

A controlled engagement scoped around a defined decision lifecycle, agreed governance controls, synthetic or approved test data, and agreed success criteria. See the Pilot Scope page for what is and isn't included.