Step 1 · Describe it

Tell us what the document is, in your words

Local names, model numbers, nicknames — all fine. We do the translating.

Your tag / local ID Site

Attach the source document (optional)

The classifier reads it. Submitting without one still works — the result will say the document was not read.

upload {{ upLabel }} {{ upMark }}

or pick one already staged on the server

Opens the document this classification was made from. A reviewer who is not convinced by the reasoning should read the source before confirming.

Nothing classified yet. Describe the document on the left, attach it, and press Classify this document — where it should be stored, why, and what else it might be about all appear here.

The classifier routed this as a reference lookup, not a new asset. Confirming will close the request without writing anything to the registry. If this really is a new asset, rephrase the description and classify again.

This is not “No match found”

“No match found” means we searched the vocabulary and nothing fitted — a real answer, and the route to an ontology gap. This is the search itself failing to run. Raising a gap here would report a missing class that may well exist.

Support reference {{ err.reqId }}

Step 2 · Proposed by AI

{{ heroCode }}

Why the AI said this Machine-written · shown as plain text

Other subjects it considered

You're overruling the AI

Your correction wins. It is recorded against your name, shown to the APAS reviewer alongside the original proposal, and fed back into the model.

AI proposed

Submersible Pump

OW-AST-PMP-SUB

→

Your classification

OW-AST-PMP-GRD · 3 sibling classes

Why is the proposal wrong? Required

Layer 2 · APAS

This is the step that writes to the registry — nothing before it touches the graph. It needs an APAS token; the operator's own token is refused here with a 403.

Committed

Written to the registry. Both approvals are on record, and the document now has a permanent address.

{{ committedIri }}

Nothing is committed on the AI's say-so

1 · You confirm

You know the yard. {{ step1Note }}

2 · APAS reviews

They know the ontology. {{ step2Note }}

3 · Committed

Permanent, versioned, auditable. {{ step3Note }}

Preview state:

{{ ir.left }}

Draft contents · 34 assets

Not submitted

Your tag

What you wrote

Proposed class

Confidence

Status

{{ row.tag }}

{{ row.err.cause }} It failed on this row only — the other 33 are unaffected.

+ 24 more rows

Ready to submit?

6 rows still need your decision. A bundle goes to review whole — nothing partial.

Riverbend's review queue is full

This utility has 12 bundles already waiting on APAS. New bundles can be submitted once some of those clear. Your draft is safe and keeps saving.

See what's waiting on review

bundle_store_full · 429 {{ capReqId }}

Draft saves as you go

Autosaved 14:22. Anyone with write access at Riverbend can pick this draft up.

Decided

{{ decidedN }} / {{ decidedTotal }}

A accept O override J / K move

Sample check — {{ sampleN }} drawn from {{ highN }}

Pass the sample and the remaining 16 are accepted as a batch, logged as a sampled acceptance. Fail any one and all {{ highN }} drop to individual review.

{{ s.tag }}

Recorded as: sampled acceptance, {{ sampleN }} of {{ highN }} inspected.

{{ m.tag }}

Operator wrote: {{ m.said }}

Machine rationale · plain text

{{ m.why }}

Layer 1 · customer

Manual mapping · 4 assets

The model has no usable proposal here. You map these by hand, or say the ontology is missing a class.

BRUTE-3 · Riverbend

“the old brute out back, off-line since 2011”

Map to a class

Decommissioned Equipment (generic)

Standby Pump · retired

Or escalate

Nothing in the vocabulary fits. Raise it with the ontology group; the asset parks in unmapped and stays out of the registry.

Ask the operator instead →

{{ banner.ref }}

{{ banner.code }} Support reference {{ banner.reqId }}

What you decided

{{ d.n }}

Tenant boundary violation — sign-off is blocked

While verifying this bundle, a relationship was found that links a Riverbend asset to an asset belonging to another utility. Tenant isolation is enforced before anything reaches the graph, so a relationship like this should not have been possible to create.

Relationships for this bundle are not shown, because a partial list would look like a normal one. This is not something you can correct from here, and retrying will not clear it — it may make it harder to trace. It has been escalated as a data-isolation incident.

The offending edge

                      LS7-P2 · Riverbend Water District
                      dischargesTo
                      FM-88 · Harbour Sanitation Authority
                    

cross_tenant_edge_detected · 409 · not retryable

Give support this reference {{ xtReqId }}

Proposed relationships

How these assets connect to each other and to what's already in the registry.

Relation between {{ rel.a }} and {{ rel.b }}

Only verbs the ontology allows between these two classes.

unconstrained in the ontology

inverse: {{ p.inverse }}

{{ p.scope }}

{{ vocabCount }} properties loaded · {{ vocabUnconstrained }} leave domain or range unstated

Verbs come from the loaded ontology — OneWater v5.4, {{ vocabCount }} properties. Tap a verb to see what it means and where it is valid.

Two signatures required

Layer 1 · Riverbend

Layer 2 · APAS

I reviewed every proposal in this bundle and take responsibility for the classifications being committed.

Committing 34 assets…

21 / 34 written · registry v412 → v413

Read-only access. You can search and export; submit, confirm and override are hidden.

Matching runs over how each thing was named and described when it was committed, not over the text inside the documents. Nothing here reads a PDF into the index yet, so a clause buried on page 40 of a permit will not be found by quoting it.

This is not “No match found”

Support reference {{ serr.reqId }}

Information architecture

Five milestone pages become three task areas plus a shared object. Navigation is filtered by role, never by capability shipped.

One rendering paradigm: server JSON, client renders

FastAPI stays a pure JSON API; every pixel is rendered client-side from that JSON. Python emits no HTML strings — that path is deleted, not deprecated.

Confidence language

Operators never see the word “confidence” or a raw probability. They see what to do.

One error envelope, three tiers of treatment

Every failure arrives in the same shape. The UI branches on error, never on message, and request_id is on screen and one click from the clipboard in every single state.

Riverbend Water District's access is suspended

{{ pageTitle }}