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 South Carolina Electric & Gas / Westinghouse's collapse?

6 bias patterns are documented in this case, led by Sunk Cost Fallacy. The full set: Sunk Cost Fallacy, Optimism Bias, Planning Fallacy, Framing Effect, 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 failureEnergy2017

South Carolina Electric & Gas / Westinghouse

V.C. Summer Nuclear Expansion Abandonment

Estimated impact: $9B in sunk costs; $2B charged to ratepayers for zero output

F12

Decision Quality Index (simulated)

Critical · 6 biases detected, 3 toxic combinations

South Carolina abandoned construction of two AP1000 nuclear reactors at V.C. Summer after spending $9B. Westinghouse (the reactor builder) went bankrupt. Ratepayers were charged $2B for reactors that will never generate electricity. Internal documents showed executives knew the project was failing years before public disclosure.

Decision context

Whether to continue nuclear construction when internal cost estimates showed the project was billions over budget and years behind schedule, or disclose the true status to regulators and ratepayers.

Decision anatomy

Monetary stakes

Very high

Dissent suppressed

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

★Sunk Cost Fallacy

critical

Optimism Bias

medium

Planning Fallacy

medium

Framing Effect

medium

Authority Bias

high

Zeigarnik Effect

medium

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

3D Decision Knowledge Graph

South Carolina Electric & Gas / Westinghouse · 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

!Sunk Ship

Commitment to a failing course escalates to justify sunk costs, even as evidence mounts.

!Blind Sprint

Overconfidence combined with planning fallacy creates unstoppable momentum toward failure.

!Deadline Panic

Compound cognitive failure pattern identified in this decision.

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

Sunk cost fallacy: $9B already spent made abandonment seem more wasteful than continued spending, even when completion was economically impossible
Planning fallacy in nuclear construction is extreme — no AP1000 reactor has been built on time or on budget globally
Framing progress in terms of percentage complete rather than remaining cost disguised the accelerating overruns

Source: South Carolina House Legislative Oversight Committee investigation (2018); Westinghouse bankruptcy filing (2017) (Case Study)

Pilot slots available

We caught these patterns in South Carolina Electric & Gas / Westinghouse'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 South Carolina Electric & Gas / Westinghouse’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 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

For CSOs and CEOs presenting to a board

Board deck pre-presentation audit

Audit a board deck before the presentation — predict the toughest questions the room will ask.

Audit your board deck

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

Related cases in Energy

Catastrophic failure2004

U.S. Army / Boeing / Sikorsky

RAH-66 Comanche Helicopter Cancellation

Catastrophic failure2000

Federal Bureau of Investigation

FBI Virtual Case File System ($170M Abandoned)

Partial failure2008

U.S. Navy / Bath Iron Works

Zumwalt-Class Destroyer Cost Overruns

Catastrophic failure2010

BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

Lessons learned

Sunk cost fallacy: $9B already spent made abandonment seem more wasteful than continued spending, even when completion was economically impossible

Planning fallacy in nuclear construction is extreme — no AP1000 reactor has been built on time or on budget globally

Framing progress in terms of percentage complete rather than remaining cost disguised the accelerating overruns