EXPLORATORY

Financial Diligence Provenance

EXPLORATORY · Early workbench / prototype. Not a standard paid product, not production-ready, and not a self-serve production service.

The problem

Which source and adjustment explain this model figure?

For PE diligence, lenders, family offices, M&A.

What you give us

For a feasibility discussion, describe the workflow and use a public filing accession or customer-authorized case id. Do not send the underlying confidential evidence through our public form.

The example below uses invented, non-sensitive text. The prototype accepts structured text only, not arbitrary PDFs, spreadsheets or scanned files.

What UD gives you

This workbench demonstrates a claim-to-source ledger, conflicting or missing evidence, recorded observations, JSON evidence, an offline HTML report and a separate verification digest. It is not a promise of production delivery.

Why anyone cares

Instead of reconstructing where a statement came from, a reviewer can follow its supporting excerpt and see disagreements or missing evidence in the same place. Actual time or cost savings have not been measured for this workbench.

No public offer; feasibility review only

Discuss feasibility, not a purchase See an example

See an example

Revenue bridge: a synthetic example, not a real customer engagement. Build the example, inspect the source excerpts, then change a copy to see verification fail.

LOCAL STRUCTURED-TEXT PROTOTYPE · NOT A LIVE PAID PRODUCT

Try the evidence workflow locally

Processing below stays in this browser. No evidence upload, AI API or automatic source retrieval. This is a structured JSON/text workflow, not a PDF, spreadsheet or tax-return parser. Start with the synthetic example. Do not paste sensitive real evidence into a public demonstration.

Expert controls: inspect or edit the synthetic input

Evidence input JSON

{
  "wedge": "finance",
  "caseId": "SYNTHETIC-finance",
  "capturedAt": "2026-09-22T12:00:00Z",
  "isTest": true,
  "sources": [
    {
      "id": "source-a",
      "text": "Statement revenue: 120. Adjustment: -5. Model revenue: 115.",
      "locator": "Revenue bridge / synthetic source A",
      "capturedAt": "2026-09-22T11:00:00Z",
      "authority": "SYNTHETIC supplied record, not a real institution"
    },
    {
      "id": "source-b",
      "text": "Model revenue: 118.",
      "locator": "Revenue bridge / synthetic source B",
      "capturedAt": "2026-09-22T11:05:00Z",
      "authority": "SYNTHETIC supplied summary"
    }
  ],
  "claims": [
    {
      "id": "mapped",
      "field": "Revenue bridge",
      "statement": "The model uses adjusted revenue.",
      "kind": "FACT",
      "citations": [
        {
          "sourceId": "source-a",
          "excerpt": "Statement revenue: 120. Adjustment: -5. Model revenue: 115.",
          "value": "115"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "conflict",
      "field": "Revenue bridge disagreement",
      "statement": "The supplied records disagree; do not silently select a winner.",
      "kind": "FACT",
      "citations": [
        {
          "sourceId": "source-a",
          "excerpt": "Statement revenue: 120. Adjustment: -5. Model revenue: 115.",
          "value": "115"
        },
        {
          "sourceId": "source-b",
          "excerpt": "Model revenue: 118.",
          "value": "118"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "unknown",
      "field": "Independent confirmation",
      "statement": "No independent confirmation has been supplied.",
      "kind": "FACT",
      "citations": []
    },
    {
      "id": "inference",
      "field": "Reviewer interpretation",
      "statement": "A reviewer proposes reconciling the records. This is inference, not a source fact.",
      "kind": "INFERENCE",
      "citations": [
        {
          "sourceId": "source-a",
          "excerpt": "Statement revenue: 120. Adjustment: -5. Model revenue: 115.",
          "value": "115"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}

For experts: See exactly how it works

Expert details

Source contract

Statements; ledgers; financial models; adjustment schedules

Declared by supplier; never inferred from a filename. No automatic retrieval or sensitive public uploads. source ID, exact text, locator, capture timestamp, authority label are required for the structured-text example.

Evidence and verification

SOURCE_LINKED means supplied text supports the recorded value, not that the source is true. CONFLICT means supplied values disagree. UNKNOWN means support is missing. INFERENCE is explicitly separate. Verification checks recorded bytes against a retained digest; it does not verify identity or certify a source.

This package records supplied evidence, declared lineage, uncertainty and integrity. It does not establish truth, legal validity, institutional acceptance, source authenticity or a trusted timestamp. No investment recommendation, valuation or fiduciary guarantee.

Change observations

LOCAL comparison only. No unattended monitoring or subscription is offered.

Synthetic examples never become customer proof. The prototype output is application evidence, not a new UD schema, UDR/UDS seal or BrowserCarrier.

Choose another evidence problem →