Scores transactions against the graph they sit in rather than in isolation, and writes the regulatory filing when it decides something is worth filing.
Runs graph traversal over counterparty history, device fingerprints and geographic movement, holding a decision to a fixed latency budget so it can sit in the authorisation path.
Runs graph traversal over counterparty history, device fingerprints and geographic movement, holding a decision to a fixed latency budget so it can sit in the authorisation path.
const risk = new NexusAgent({ role: 'risk', latencyBudgetMs: 20 });
const decision = await risk.score({
transaction: payload,
graphDepth: 3,
onExceed: 'hold'
});
if (decision.action === 'hold') gateway.freeze(payload.id);
Published examples, reproduced verbatim. This page does not call a model.
Score this transfer: €9,400 from a two-month-old business account to a new counterparty in another jurisdiction.
Score 87 of 100. Recommend hold pending review. In isolation this is unremarkable. In the graph it is the ninth transfer from this account in eleven days, each between €9,100 and €9,800 — all beneath the €10,000 reporting threshold, none to the same counterparty twice, and six of the nine counterparties share a registered address. That pattern is structuring. The individual amounts are the evidence, not the exception. Draft filing prepared with the nine transactions, the shared-address finding and the timeline. It needs a compliance officer's review and signature before submission — I do not file, and the draft is marked as such.