FICTIONAL / SYNTHETIC DEPLOYMENT MODEL. "Forge Property Management" is an invented customer. No real customer data was used and no real production results are claimed. All figures come from a deterministic synthetic corpus and stated illustrative assumptions.
100,000 Work Order Simulation

Certification Report

← Back to case study

Certification Report — Forge PM 100,000 Work Order Simulation

FICTIONAL / SYNTHETIC DEPLOYMENT MODEL. No real customer data was used. No
real production results are claimed.

Posture

FieldValue
Proof Layer statePROOF_INCOMPLETE
Evidence GradeB
Trust Score80 / 100
Simulation-tier labelFICTIONAL_DEPLOYMENT_MODEL_CERTIFIED
VerificationPASS (27/27 checks)
StandardIRS_AUDITOR

The Proof Layer (tools/forge-proof.mjs) assigns the authoritative state. Because the customer and data are fictional — a disclosed outcome seam — the state is intentionally not CERTIFIED or PRODUCTION_VALIDATED. The simulation-tier label FICTIONAL_DEPLOYMENT_MODEL_CERTIFIED is a separate, narrower claim: *the simulation is internally validated and reproducible.* It is not a statement about a real deployment.

Basis

  • 100,000 synthetic work orders processed through the real ecosystem

(real PostgreSQL + real gRPC), 27/27 MUST_PASS checks.

  • Classification 100.0%, exception recall

100.0%, false-auto-action 0.00%, audit completeness 100.0%.

  • Deterministic corpus (seed 20260625); every number reproducible.

Why not PRODUCTION_VALIDATED

PRODUCTION_VALIDATED requires live production evidence, an official benchmark, independent reproduction, and external validation against real data. None of those exist for a fictional customer. Claiming it would be dishonest, so it is not claimed.

Disclosed seams

  • FICTIONAL CUSTOMER: "Forge Property Management" is an invented enterprise. No real customer relationship, deployment, or contract exists. This is a synthetic deployment model, not a production case study.
  • SYNTHETIC DATA: All 100,000 work orders are generated by a seeded PRNG (src/enterprise-synth.mjs) with a ground-truth answer key. Reported accuracy is against that synthetic key, not real tenant text; absolute accuracy on real intake will differ.
  • SIMULATED OPERATIONS & ROI: Manual handling time, exception review time, coordinator cost, implementation cost, and platform cost are stated illustrative assumptions (assumptions.json), not measured production figures. The ROI is a transparent model, not a realized financial result.
  • LIVE INFRASTRUCTURE (in-process): Persistence is the real PostgreSQL engine via PGlite (in-memory for this run) and dispatch crosses a real gRPC/HTTP2 wire to a Node service on localhost. An external Postgres (DATABASE_URL) and a Go gRPC service are wire-compatible disclosed seams, not exercised here.
  • DISCLOSED_SEAM: The classifier is a deterministic lexicon model, not a hosted LLM. The production design swaps an LLM behind the same interface; that swap is unverified here.
  • AT-LEAST-ONCE DISPATCH: Under load a Dispatch RPC can occasionally exceed its client deadline after the gRPC server has already committed the dispatch row. The actioner escalates those orders to a human exception (never double-dispatches, never silently drops), so dispatch_records can slightly exceed the auto-dispatched count. The exact orphan count is transport-timing dependent and not bit-identical across runs; the reconciliation identity (dispatch_records = auto-dispatched + safely-escalated orphans) holds every run.

_Generated by build-deliverables.mjs from verification-report.json._