Example Governed Decision Records
Companion artefacts
These companion artefacts show the same Governed Decision Record structure applied across a range of decision contexts. Each example is stylised, but the structure is intended to be realistic enough to show how context, reasoning, authority, constraints, disputes, consent, harm trace, outcome, and provenance can be recorded consistently.
The commercial examples are presented first: AI oversight under EU AI Act Article 14, algorithmic trading under the FCA Senior Managers and Certification Regime, an autonomous procurement agent acting within delegated authority, and a regulated product design review held over for a notified body audit. The remaining examples extend the same record structure across clinical, safeguarding, chemistry, and neurotech contexts.
- AI oversight decision (customer service refund escalation, EU AI Act Article 14), /record/example/ai-oversight/
- Financial decision (algorithmic trading block review, FCA SMCR), /record/example/financial/
- Agent decision (autonomous procurement contract within delegated authority), /record/example/agent/
- Engineering decision (regulated product design review, ISO 13485 and MHRA Class IIb), /record/example/engineering/
- Clinical decision (burns triage), /record/example/clinical/
- Safeguarding decision (school escalation), /record/example/safeguarding/
- Chemistry decision (autonomous laboratory synthesis halt), /record/example/chemistry/
- Neurotech decision (closed-loop BCI adaptive stimulation revert), /record/example/neurotech/
| Example | Decision context | Governance pressure | Record emphasis |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI Oversight | Customer service agent refund escalated above its authorised threshold | EU AI Act Article 14 human oversight, financial liability above the agent ceiling | Authority schedule, agent prepared case, named human decision, signed approval token |
| Financial | Algorithmic trading system flags a borderline block trade for Senior Manager review | FCA Senior Managers and Certification Regime accountability, FCA section 165 enquiry eighteen months later | Pre-trade risk packet, named SMF22 decision, recorded disagreement, sealed evidence preserved for the regulatory enquiry |
| Agent | Autonomous procurement agent commits a supplier contract within delegated authority | Operator of record accountability, delegated authority schedule, audit defensibility | Full authority chain, reasoning, evidence and assumptions, expected outcome recorded before execution |
| Engineering | Regulated product design review (surgical robotics end effector) | ISO 13485 design controls, MHRA Class IIb, notified body audit defensibility, product liability exposure | Verification evidence, design authority, rejected paths, outcome review, evidence sealed for future enquiry |
| Clinical | Burns triage and transfer decision | Urgent clinical judgement under partial information | Referral criteria, consent, specialist handover, reassessment triggers |
| Safeguarding | School escalation decision | Contested information, pupil voice, statutory thresholds | Threshold reasoning, information sharing, disagreement, monitoring triggers |
| Chemistry | Overnight autonomous synthesis halt following vision-language model safety alert | Laboratory accreditation (ISO 17025), AI management (ISO 42001), EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping | Authority chain across alert-only AI layer and human halt decision; deviation from declared visual envelope; halt-and-isolate before morning review |
| Neurotech | Closed-loop brain-computer interface adaptive stimulation reverted to safe-default programme following biomarker drift | Medical device regulation (EU MDR 2017/745, IEC 60601-2-10), AI management (ISO 42001), EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping | Authority chain across envelope-bound on-device policy and human revert decision; sustained biomarker drift outside declared envelope; revert and freeze model state before morning review |
The substrate paper describing the underlying architecture is available at /substrate/.