Classification logic fragments
The same underlying instrument can be evaluated through different mappings, transformations, teams, and regulatory interpretations.
While banks can easily track the origin of their regulatory data, reconstructing the logic behind an instrument's classification under a specific rule version remains a major challenge.
Banks have invested heavily in data governance, lineage, integration, and regulatory reporting. Yet the regulatory decision connecting the data to the filing can remain embedded in downstream transformation logic, mappings, and reporting processes.
That creates three structural challenges:
The same underlying instrument can be evaluated through different mappings, transformations, teams, and regulatory interpretations.
Differences are often discovered after regulatory views have been assembled forcing teams to reconcile outcomes rather than govern the decisions that produced them.
Traditional lineage can explain where data came from and how it moved. It does not necessarily explain why.
Why is this instrument on this regulatory line, under which version of which rule, and who approved that interpretation?
Pulse introduces a governed classification layer between source data and regulatory reporting.
Extract
Classify
Cite
Govern
Feed
Trace
Pulse Classify is pre-production, with the MVP being developed with design partners. We are onboarding a limited number of institutions to validate the architecture against real reporting requirements.
Start with:
The objective is straightforward: Demonstrate that regulatory classifications can be governed upstream, reproduced, and traced from the reported outcome back to the decision that produced it.