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 failureEnergy2011

Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO)

Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster

Estimated impact: $200B+ cleanup costs; 154,000 evacuees; region contaminated for decades

F14

Decision Quality Index

Critical — 5 biases detected, 2 toxic combinations

A magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami caused three reactor meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi. TEPCO had been warned that its tsunami defenses were inadequate but resisted upgrades to avoid regulatory scrutiny and shutdown costs. The backup diesel generators were placed in basements vulnerable to flooding.

Decision context

Whether to upgrade tsunami barriers and relocate backup generators based on updated seismic and tsunami risk assessments that showed the plant's defenses were inadequate.

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 BiasAnchoring BiasOptimism BiasLoss AversionCognitive Misering

3D Decision Knowledge Graph

Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) — 5 biases, 2 toxic combinations

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
Optimism Trap

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: TEPCO treated existing tsunami barriers as adequate despite updated geological evidence showing larger historical tsunamis
Loss aversion around shutdown costs prevented investment in safety upgrades that were trivial relative to the eventual catastrophe
Optimism bias in nuclear safety assumes the worst case is bounded by historical experience, ignoring geological evidence of rarer, larger events

Source: National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission (NAIIC) Report (2012) (Post Mortem)

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 Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), 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 failure2018

Pacific Gas and Electric

PG&E Camp Fire Liability

Lessons learned

Status quo bias: TEPCO treated existing tsunami barriers as adequate despite updated geological evidence showing larger historical tsunamis

Loss aversion around shutdown costs prevented investment in safety upgrades that were trivial relative to the eventual catastrophe

Optimism bias in nuclear safety assumes the worst case is bounded by historical experience, ignoring geological evidence of rarer, larger events