How is sensitive data protected?

All documents are encrypted with AES-256-GCM at rest and TLS 1.2+ in transit. A GDPR anonymization layer removes PII before any AI processing. Hosted on Vercel + Supabase (both SOC 2 Type II); Decision Intel’s own product-level audit is targeted for Q4 2026.

How long does integration take?

Less than 30 minutes. Upload documents directly, connect via OAuth for Slack, or use our REST API for bulk processing.

How does outcome tracking work?

Outcomes are detected automatically from follow-up documents, Slack messages, and web intelligence. You confirm with one click. Each reported outcome makes your future analyses more accurate.

How is Decision Intel different from ChatGPT or a general AI assistant?

ChatGPT gives one opinion from one model: ungoverned, untraceable, unaudited. Decision Intel is the reasoning audit platform. Most tools audit your data; we audit your reasoning — and catch the fatal blind spots in strategic memos before the committee does. It measures the noise in your reasoning the same way Kahneman did in the insurance underwriter study, simulates an AI boardroom of CEO, CFO, and board personas, runs what-if interventions against a 143-case public reference library, and compounds every confirmed outcome back into a calibrated Decision Quality Index your audit committee can defend. Not a chatbot; a reasoning audit, checkable from memo to outcome.

Which cognitive biases caused Amaranth Advisors's collapse?

6 bias patterns are documented in this case, led by Anchoring Bias. The full set: Anchoring Bias, Overconfidence Bias, Hindsight Bias, Recency Bias, Authority Bias. Each is mapped to Decision Intel's 22-bias R²F taxonomy with stable IDs and academic citations.

What is Decision Intel's reasoning audit?

Decision Intel runs a 12-node Recognition-Rigor Framework (R²F) pipeline on strategic memos, detecting cognitive biases from a 22-bias canonical taxonomy and producing a Decision Quality Index (DQI) score. The audit produces a hashed, tamper-evident Decision Provenance Record (DPR) suitable for audit-committee review.

All case studies

Catastrophic failureFinancial Services2006

Amaranth Advisors

Amaranth Advisors Natural Gas Losses

Estimated impact: $6.6B

F12

Decision Quality Index (simulated)

Critical · 6 biases detected, 3 toxic combinations

Multi-strategy hedge fund Amaranth lost $6.6B in a single week on leveraged natural gas futures positions. Trader Brian Hunter had accumulated positions that exceeded the fund's total capital, and risk limits were repeatedly raised to accommodate his growing bets.

Decision context

Whether to enforce position limits on natural gas trades or continue raising limits as the trader's positions grew larger and the fund became increasingly concentrated.

Decision anatomy

Monetary stakes

Very high

Dissent suppressed

Yes

Time pressure

Present

Unanimous consensus

Decision participants

Dissent encouraged

External advisors

Iterative process

Red = risk factor present · Green = protective factor present

Deep hindsight-stripped analysis coming soon. This case is part of our ongoing backfill to reconstruct what the platform would have flagged at decision time. The summary and bias profile below are drawn from primary sources.

Biases present in the decision

★Anchoring Bias

critical

Overconfidence Bias

high

Hindsight Bias

medium

Recency Bias

medium

Authority Bias

high

Gambler's Fallacy

medium

★ Primary driver · Severity estimated from bias type and decision outcome

3D Decision Knowledge Graph

Amaranth Advisors · 6 biases, 3 toxic combinations

Drag to rotate · Scroll to zoom · Click to explore

Decision

Critical

High

Medium

Toxic

Bias Intensity Profile

Severity × confidence across 6 detected biases

Toxic combinations

!Recency Spiral

Compound cognitive failure pattern identified in this decision.

!Yes Committee

Authority bias meets groupthink: the group converges on whatever leadership signals it wants.

!Doubling Down

Confirmation bias reinforces sunk cost thinking into an escalating commitment loop.

Reference class base rates

Across all 143 curated case studies in our library:

89%

base failure rate

-0%

partial / mixed

11%

base success rate

■ Failure■ Partial■ Success

Lessons learned

Recency bias from Hunter's prior profitable natural gas trades led to risk limit increases rather than enforcement
Position concentration in illiquid commodity futures creates liquidity risk that cannot be hedged during a crisis
When a single trader generates the majority of fund profits, authority bias makes risk managers reluctant to constrain them

Source: U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, "Excessive Speculation in the Natural Gas Market" (2007) (Case Study)

Pilot slots available

We caught these patterns in Amaranth Advisors's own record — before the outcome.

See the full bias auditwe ran — no login, no card. Then run the same 60-second audit on your own next memo.

See a live audit · no login Audit your own memo

Or leave your email, we'll run a strategic memo of your choosing and send the readout within a business day.

Audit your own decision

Workflows that fire on decisions like Amaranth Advisors’s

The same Recognition-Rigor Framework that documents this case audits memos in the same shape — before the outcome forces the lesson.

For CSOs and Heads of Strategic Planning

Strategic memo audit

Audit a strategic memo for cognitive bias and forecast errors in 60 seconds — before the board sees it.

Audit a strategic memo

For VC / PE General Partners

Fund investment thesis audit

Audit a fund investment thesis before the LP raise — catch Narrative Coherence, Reference-Class Blindness, and Optimism Trap.

Audit a fund thesis

For any high-stakes decision, before commitment

Decision pre-mortem

Run a structured pre-mortem before the decision is final — surface failure modes the room cannot see from the inside.

Run a pre-mortem

See all 6 workflows for the full audit-tool surface.

Related cases in Financial Services

Catastrophic failure2007

Bear Stearns

Bear Stearns Hedge Fund Collapse

Catastrophic failure2023

Silicon Valley Bank

Silicon Valley Bank Collapse

Failure2021

Credit Suisse

Credit Suisse Archegos Capital Losses

Partial failure2020

Equity Group Holdings PLC

Equity Group Pan-African Banking Expansion (DRC + Rwanda)

Lessons learned

Recency bias from Hunter's prior profitable natural gas trades led to risk limit increases rather than enforcement

Position concentration in illiquid commodity futures creates liquidity risk that cannot be hedged during a crisis

When a single trader generates the majority of fund profits, authority bias makes risk managers reluctant to constrain them