01 / PROBLEM
Credit appraisal draws on fragmented borrower information, calculations, policy and judgment. A fluent AI summary can conceal missing inputs or blur the difference between an assessed rule and a question that was never checked.
CASE STUDY 01 / CREDIT DECISION SUPPORT
Demo · under testingUnderwriteAI
Keep the reasoning behind a credit draft visible.
An underwriting workbench that separates document interpretation, calculations, rule checks and narrative so a reviewer can inspect how a credit case was built.
02 / MY CONTRIBUTION
I defined the borrower questions, evidence requirements, calculation inputs and human review points. I built and tested the synthetic workflow shown below.
03 / DEMONSTRATION
Inspect a fictional borrower, change two inputs, see a coded calculation and read a template memorandum extract.
Inspect the example ↓04 / TESTING STATUS
Synthetic demo · under testing. The wider document and AI workflow remains under validation. No live borrower assessment or production outcome is implied.
INSPECT THE WORK / SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE
From an input
to a question worth asking.
Invented figures only. This small portfolio demonstration runs in your browser, stores nothing and makes no AI request. The memorandum extract is a template populated by coded calculations.
01 / INFORMATION SUPPLIED
Juniper Workshop Ltd
Fictional UK equipment manufacturer · FY2025 · GBP
- Annual revenue
- £1,200,000
- Requested equipment facility
- £300,000
Try changing a figure or removing an input to inspect the response.
02 / CALCULATION & EVIDENCE GAP
Debt / EBITDA
3.00×
£600,000 ÷ £200,000 = 3.00×
Existing total debt / annual EBITDA. This is a leverage measure, not a lending decision.
03 / TEMPLATE MEMORANDUM EXTRACT
“The borrower requests £300,000 for equipment. Using the current inputs, existing debt / EBITDA is 3.00×. This ratio does not establish repayment capacity. Reconcile debt to lender statements, test EBITDA adjustments and obtain the repayment schedule before forming a credit view.”
Illustrative working note, not an approval recommendation. No policy threshold or regulatory check has been applied.
04 / MY REVIEW QUESTIONS
- Does EBITDA exclude exceptional income, and what supports the adjustments?
- How much operating profit converts to cash after tax and working-capital needs?
- What existing repayments and contingent obligations fall due?
- What are the facility terms, security position and downside cash-flow assumptions?
Explore the approach & product workflow
The approach
My credit experience determines which questions need answering, which assumptions require challenge and which issues need escalation. The synthetic demo uses coded calculations and a template memorandum. In the wider workflow under validation, AI is intended to support information organisation and draft preparation; a qualified reviewer remains responsible for the conclusions.
The workbench is designed to assemble borrower evidence, financial metrics, risk arguments and a reviewable memorandum. Its market-specific design covers US, UK and onshore UAE contexts, with jurisdiction and currency kept explicit.
The public experience is currently a synthetic interactive demo. A visitor can inspect fictional source figures, change assumptions, see ratios update and open an example memorandum. The broader live document workflow remains under validation; public live trials are not open.
HOW THE WORK FITS TOGETHER
- 01Inspect evidence
- 02Review extracted figures
- 03Calculate metrics
- 04Assess rule coverage
- 05Challenge and draft
- 06Human review
Inside the product
Visible calculations
The public demo calculates debt / EBITDA, current ratio, loan-to-value and EBITDA / annual debt service from stated inputs. EBITDA-based coverage is a simplified proxy; it does not establish cash available for debt service. The portfolio example below isolates leverage and missing inputs.
Four distinct rule states
Finding, no finding, not checked and not applicable communicate different answers. A quiet checker is never an overall compliance clearance.
A challenge to the case
The wider workflow is designed to include a separate risk perspective before the narrative is assembled. Its effectiveness remains to be validated.
Evidence-conscious handling
The synthetic portfolio example accepts numerical edits only, stores nothing and sends no borrower data or AI request. Real-document handling in the wider product remains under validation.
A CLEAR VIEW OF READINESS
What is ready.
What still needs work.
- The public demo uses invented business cases. It does not analyse real borrower files or demonstrate a completed live trial.
- The system is decision support, not a lender, regulatory certification or a replacement for institutional policy and qualified review.
- Rule coverage is bounded and must be checked for applicability and currency. UAE scope is onshore, excluding DIFC and ADGM.
- No production deployment, accuracy guarantee or customer outcome is implied by the sample.
What comes next
Complete live workflow validation, test representative edge cases and document the limits of each jurisdiction before expanding trial access.
WHAT THIS PROJECT SAYS ABOUT MY WORK
In credit, “not checked” can be the most valuable thing a system tells you. Confidence should follow the evidence.
Status reviewed September 2026. Descriptions distinguish implemented work, public demonstrations and remaining validation.