AI decision benchmarking for regulated enterprises

Benchmark AI
before you trust it.

Authentia runs agents beside your experts, benchmarks every decision against theirs, and measures regulatory alignment — so autonomy is granted on evidence, not trust.

app.authentia.ai/benchmark — shadow run
Credit line increase · case BNK-2214
Banking · concentration threshold
shadow run
Human decision
Approve · conditions

Senior credit officer — mitigation verified.

Agent decision
Refer
Compliance score
human 91%agent 97%
Drift detectedsource: threshold interpretation · Δ 6%
Explanation
Human stays in command — tune §4.2, re-benchmarkautonomy not yet earned

One decision, benchmarked — the entire product in one card

IBM watsonx

IBM watsonx partner

Provisioned and running end-to-end on IBM watsonx today.

watsonx.ai

reasoning

watsonx Orchestrate

orchestration

watsonx.data

enrichment

watsonx.governance

audit & guardrails

The problem

AI is making regulated decisions.
How do you know when it deserves autonomy?

Vendors ask you to trust their agents. Regulators ask you to prove your decisions. Between those two demands sits a gap no demo closes — only evidence does.

Authentia sits at the decision layer and replaces nothing. You're not migrating systems — you're benchmarking decisions.

01

Authentia runs agents beside your experts.

02

Every decision is benchmarked.

03

Every disagreement is explained.

04

Every action is auditable.

Built for regulated decisions in

InsuranceBankingWealthHealthcareGovernment

The product — human × agent

Your experts are the champion.
Our agents are the challenger.

Champion/challenger is how risk teams have always proven a new decision strategy. Authentia applies it to AI: a bench of agents decides in shadow beside your experts, and every agreement, every drift, and every compliance delta becomes evidence — including which agent has earned which decision.

See the drift

Every human–agent divergence is surfaced, explained, and traced to its source — a threshold, an appetite call, or missing context.

Bench the agents

Not one model — a bench. Every case is scored across several reasoning agents from the watsonx.ai catalog, and the gauges show which one decides most like your best people, decision type by decision type.

Close the gaps

Tune the guidelines and teach the agents how your institution actually decides — with evidence from your own cases, not anecdotes.

Widen the mandate

An A/B test of your decision bottlenecks, not a big-bang migration. Nothing changes hands until you decide it should.

Trust here is a number on a board — and you set the bar it has to clear.
app.authentia.ai/drift — shadow run · sample data
Decision Drift · 30-day shadow run
your team vs. the agent bench · every case benchmarked
87%
Agreement
94%
Compliance
4
Agents benched
Your team · champion
Approve · conditions

Approved with conditions — long-standing client, mitigation verified by the senior credit officer.

Lead agent · challenger
Refer

> refer · policy §4.2 · concentration threshold exceeded

bench · gpt-oss REFER · granite REFER · mistral REFER · llama APPROVE

Compliancehuman 91% · agent 97% · Δ 6%
What explains the gap

Drift source: threshold interpretation. Your team approves with verified mitigation; the agents read §4.2 strictly. Seven similar cases this quarter — the policy and the practice disagree.

Keep human sign-off — tune §4.2, then re-benchmarkrecommendation
01 Shadowstart here
02 Assist
03 Autonomy

Click a case, or open the agent bench — sample data from a 30-day shadow run

Benchmarking engine

Every decision runs the gauntlet.
Evidence comes out the other side.

Five stages, every case, continuously. Deterministic where it must be, agentic where it pays — and audit-ready at every step.

· Same case, same rules, every model on the bench — that's what makes it a benchmark

Adoption

Prove it in shadow.
Adopt at your pace.

A path you can stop at any step and still be better off. From first shadow run to autonomy, a person is in command the whole way.

your expertcase INS-2101 → Approve
agent · shadowcase INS-2101 → Approve · logged only

same case, parallel decision — zero customer impact

no workflow change
agreement with your team87%
42 cases scoreddrift: 5avg compliance Δ: 2.1%
evidence, not faith
routine approvalsagent
policy-boundary caseshuman
incomplete filesagent
reversible by design

Compliance

Built for the examiner
as much as the operator.

Governed AI

Agents operate inside guardrails you set — never beyond the mandate you’ve granted.

Explainability

Every decision ships with its reason, in language your reviewers can read.

Auditability

A complete, tamper-evident trail — the examiner’s evidence exists before the question.

Regulatory alignment

Decisions scored continuously against your policies and the rules that govern you.

Your data stays inside your environmentHuman-in-commandComplete audit trailEnterprise deployment

Grant autonomy on evidence,
not trust.

See your own decisions benchmarked — human beside agent, compliance measured, drift explained. What the agents take on next is decided by their record, and by you.