How is sensitive data protected?

All documents are encrypted with AES-256-GCM at rest and TLS 1.3 in transit. A GDPR anonymization layer removes PII before any AI processing. Your data never leaves our SOC 2 certified infrastructure.

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?

ChatGPT gives one opinion from one model. Decision Intel uses 3 independent judges for noise measurement, a 20×20 bias interaction matrix for compound scoring, 31 domain-specific biases, and an outcome flywheel that gets smarter with every decision.

All case studies

Catastrophic failureEnergy2018

Pacific Gas and Electric

PG&E Camp Fire Liability

Estimated impact: $13.5B

F17

Decision Quality Index

Critical — 5 biases detected, 1 toxic combinations

PG&E's failure to maintain aging transmission infrastructure caused the Camp Fire, the deadliest and most destructive wildfire in California history. The fire killed 85 people and destroyed 18,804 structures. PG&E had deferred maintenance and vegetation management for years despite knowing its equipment posed wildfire risks.

Decision context

Whether to invest in replacing aging transmission lines and aggressive vegetation management in high-risk wildfire zones, or to continue deferring maintenance to reduce operating costs.

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

★ Status Quo BiasCognitive MiseringLoss AversionAnchoring BiasPlanning Fallacy

3D Decision Knowledge Graph

Pacific Gas and Electric — 5 biases, 1 toxic combination

Drag to rotate · Scroll to zoom · Click to explore

Decision

Critical

High

Medium

Toxic

Bias Intensity Profile

Severity × confidence across 5 detected biases

Toxic combinations

Status Quo Lock

Reference class base rates

Across all 146 curated case studies in our library:

90%

base failure rate

10%

base success rate

Lessons learned

Status quo bias in infrastructure maintenance means deferred spending accumulates as hidden risk until catastrophic failure.
Cognitive misering in risk assessments leads utilities to treat wildfire risk as a low-probability event rather than updating for climate change.
Loss aversion around short-term earnings prevents the capital investment needed to prevent long-term catastrophic losses.

Source: Cal Fire Investigation Report on Camp Fire (2019); PG&E Chapter 11 filing (2019) (Case Study)

Pilot slots available

See what we'd flag in your next strategic memo.

Upload a strategic memo or board deck. Get the same bias audit you just saw for Pacific Gas and Electric, on your own high-stakes call, in under 60 seconds.

Try the Demo — Free Request a Pilot

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

Ready to audit your own memo right now? Create a free account →

Related cases in Energy

Catastrophic failure2010

BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

Catastrophic failure2015

General Electric

GE Alstom Power Acquisition

Catastrophic failure2011

Solyndra

Solyndra Bankruptcy

Lessons learned

Status quo bias in infrastructure maintenance means deferred spending accumulates as hidden risk until catastrophic failure.

Cognitive misering in risk assessments leads utilities to treat wildfire risk as a low-probability event rather than updating for climate change.

Loss aversion around short-term earnings prevents the capital investment needed to prevent long-term catastrophic losses.