Evidence sufficiency, stated openly
Before a conclusion is offered, the platform scores whether the evidence held can support it. Where a mandatory class is missing, it says so and refuses the verdict rather than producing a confident sentence with nothing behind it.
- ▸Readiness scoring per conclusion, with the blocking evidence class named
- ▸Sealed predictions, timestamped before recovery, so accuracy is measurable
- ▸Full audit chain over every record, edit, review and release
- ▸Independent peer review, with self-approval structurally prevented
- ▸Safety recommendation drafting tied to the finding that produced it
- ▸Report structure aligned to ICAO Annex 13 headings
- ▸Privacy-preserving cross-case patterns built only from cases the authorised user can access
Oversight across a fleet, not one event at a time
Occurrences accumulate into a picture. Recurring precursors across operators, aircraft types and aerodromes are surfaced from authorised case records, while case-level access remains isolated. This makes a systemic issue visible without turning one investigator's access into organisation-wide access.
The authority remains the determiner of cause
SeyAero is advisory throughout. It narrows the space of explanations the evidence permits and shows why. Findings and causes remain the sole responsibility of the investigating authority under ICAO Annex 13, Chapter 5.