AI Reviewer Auto-clear

Close cases faster. Stay accountable.

AI-assisted case review: auto-clear low-risk alerts, draft escalation rationale, and stamp every decision with a 1:1 reviewer-accountable audit trail compliant with IMDA / FCA / EU AI Act.

Book a Demo → See the flow

Trusted by 500+ institutions across 180 jurisdictions

60%

Analyst hours saved

Time previously spent reconstructing context returns to genuine judgement — measured across production case queues.

1:1

Reviewer accountability

Every decision binds to a named reviewer. AI assists; the human signs. Aligned with IMDA and FCA SS1/23 expectations.

100%

Decisions audit-stamped

Inputs, AI summary, reviewer rationale, policy version — captured at decision time, exportable on demand.

How it works

Three things that make AI-assisted review defensible.

AI summarises every case

Alert context, customer risk history, watchlist hits, transaction patterns, and a drafted case narrative — assembled before the reviewer opens the case.

Reviewer is the decision-maker

AI never auto-clears, auto-files, or auto-escalates. Every case closes with a human signature — accountability stays with the institution and its responsible officers.

Audit trail by construction

Inputs, AI summary, reviewer rationale, policy version, model version — written to an append-only log at decision time. Ready for examination before a regulator asks.

Recognised by the Industry^*

* In collaboration with Cynopsis Solutions

FAQ

Common questions about AI Reviewer

What percentage of cases does the AI Reviewer auto-clear?

Across deployed customers we see 55–70% auto-clear on low-risk KYC review queues and 35–50% on AML monitoring alerts, depending on the underlying rule precision. The threshold is configurable; conservative deployments start at 30% auto-clear with full reviewer audit.

How is reviewer accountability preserved when AI auto-clears?

Every disposition — AI or human — is signed with the reviewer identity (AI model version + sign-off, or human user ID). Regulators ask 'who decided and on what evidence?' and the answer is a single replayable audit envelope. There is no anonymous AI decisioning.

Can the MLRO override AI decisions?

Yes. MLROs and senior compliance officers have full override + replay rights. Any override is captured with the rationale, and downstream typology weights / triage thresholds can be adjusted in shadow mode before promotion to production.

Which AI governance frameworks does the reviewer align with?

Singapore IMDA Model AI Governance + AI Verify, UK FCA SS1/23 (model risk for AI), EU AI Act (high-risk system controls), US SR 11-7 (model risk), MAS FEAT principles, NIST AI RMF, and ISO/IEC 42001 AI management system.

What does the audit export look like?

PDF or signed JSON. Each case carries: source alerts, customer identity envelope, AI triage rationale (chain-of-evidence), human reviewer ID + sign-off, policy + model versions, and the disposition. Reproducible bit-for-bit on replay.

Does AI Reviewer process PII outside the customer's region?

No. The reviewer runs in-region (SG, EU, US, HK, MY) with regional model endpoints. PII never crosses a regulatory boundary unless the customer explicitly opts in for a cross-border review queue.

AI on the work. Humans on the call.

30-minute call. We replay one of your historic cases through AI Reviewer and walk the evidence chain, the AI summary, and the audit export.

Book a Demo → See Case Management

Close cases faster. Stay accountable.

Three things that make AI-assisted review defensible.

AI summarises every case

Reviewer is the decision-maker

Audit trail by construction

Common questions about AI Reviewer

One platform. Shared identity envelope.

Transaction Monitoring

KYC Onboarding

Know Your Agent

AI on the work. Humans on the call.