Product overview
Compare options and see what needs checking.
PÓLYA weaves the evidence HARBINGER verifies into one picture of the situation, showing what corroborates, what conflicts, and which gaps remain. It does not choose the interpretation.
FIXED TEST CASE
Structure a credit-deterioration signal for review.
Use fixed test data to inspect the signal, options, dissent, and review conditions.CASE / SIGNAL
- Case
- case.credit-001Fixed TEST_ONLY fixture
- SignalBriefRef
- opaqueCOUNTEREVIDENCE
- Scope
- finance.credit.exposure.review
Structure a credit-deterioration signal for review.
Input
CASE / SIGNAL
- Case
- case.credit-001Fixed TEST_ONLY fixture
- SignalBriefRef
- opaqueCOUNTEREVIDENCE
- Scope
- finance.credit.exposure.review
Structure
OPTIONS / DISSENT / REVIEW
- Options
- maintain · reduce · freeze new exposure
- Dissent
- liquidity evidence incomplete
- Review trigger
- COUNTEREVIDENCEPrior Decision preserved
Result
DECISION GRAPH / RESULT
- Status
- REVIEW_REQUIRED
- DecisionCaseRef
- opaque / digest-bound
- Authority
- NONENo recommendation, approval, or execution
Structure conditions and options before a decision
PÓLYA receives evidence-bearing observations from HARBINGER and organizes them into options, constraints, assumptions, and review conditions. It does not own final choice or approval authority.
Build a reviewable decision structure
- 01Receive bounded observations
Use evidence, time, relationships, conflicts, and gaps without discarding provenance.
- 02Define options and constraints
Make alternatives, exclusions, dependencies, and trade-offs explicit.
- 03Test decision conditions
Show what supports, weakens, or blocks each condition.
- 04Pass the review on without granting authority
Pass reviewed conditions to the appropriate human and, where applicable, the RAIFFA control boundary.
Keep decision conditions attached to evidence
An option should remain a reviewable condition record, not a persuasive sentence. It should state which observations were used, what was excluded, when the condition expires, and who is accountable for the next check.
- Option and explicit exclusion conditions
- Supporting and weakening observations with evidence coordinates
- Assumptions, dependencies, conflicts, and temporal validity
- Unresolved gaps and the accountable next reviewer
Insufficient evidence leaves the review unresolved
When evidence is insufficient or incompatible, PÓLYA does not manufacture a ranking. It returns why the review cannot be completed and what must be checked next.
- Missing material observation or origin evidence
- Incompatible conditions or counter-signals
- Stale observations or expired assumptions
- No accountable owner or decision criterion
- No feasible option inside the current constraints
PÓLYA is not a recommendation engine
Its output is a decision structure for review, not a final selection, approval, or execution request.