Put the project update in context.
Bring authorised project records together with dated observations of the site.
Deep-tech fintech for banks.
Construction finance · Real-estate collateral · Infrastructure
The physical world does not wait for your next review.
3BrainAI’s Construction Risk Intelligence brings dated satellite observations and project context into traceable evidence for construction finance and collateral review. Specialist analysis and AI are central to our technical approach.
Before the next drawdown, make clear what the evidence supports – and what still needs checking.
- Formal review
- Evidence Pack
- Next review
- CRI
- The review-support product.
- Evidence Pack
- The versioned review record.
- The Brief
- A private walkthrough of prepared situations.
How Construction Risk Intelligence works
Prepare the next review with the evidence in one place.
Know what each source supports.
Examine each source, its date and its relevance to the review question.
Keep the findings together.
Record the findings, their supporting sources and the next review step in an Evidence Pack.
Give the reviewer a clear starting point.
The responsible reviewer examines the evidence and records the next action under the institution’s own rules.
Case study · Real historical Copernicus data
The roof is visible.
Is the milestone verified?
See how this public example separates a visible change from the evidence still needed for a construction drawdown review.
DEMO-EU-AT-FIS-01 · v0.3 public source review
Fischamend, Lower Austria
Vienna Airport logistics park observation area · Human review required
Did large roofed structures become visible within the observation area between the two dated public optical scenes?
The full pack retains the dated sources, observation limits and next review question.
WATCH – Evidence sufficiency
High – large roofed footprint change only
Which structures and project phase should the reviewer relate to these observations? Confirm the relevant asset boundary, milestone definition and dated technical records before assessing progress against a project plan.
The relevant project records must define the asset boundary and milestone before an institution-specific assessment.
20 Aug 2023 → 19 Aug 2025
Two large rectangular roofed structures became visible within the selected observation area, replacing predominantly bare or construction-affected surface.
The imagery shows surface-visible change. It does not establish building completion, quality, fit-out, occupancy, environmental compliance, contractual acceptance or payment eligibility. Documentary and engineering evidence remain necessary before any institution-specific conclusion.
Exact project boundary, engineering completion and payment eligibility remain unverified. WATCH refers to evidence sufficiency and the need for documentary review; it is not a negative project rating and does not indicate delay, breach or default.
Modified Copernicus Sentinel data 2023 and 2025 · same working retrieval envelope · public source review v0.3.
Mandatory qualifications – read the record boundary
Independent case study based on public project information and dated Copernicus observations. No affiliation with or mandate from the owner, operator, tenants or financing institutions is implied.
No actual project drawdown request, lender decision, contractual milestone, delay, breach, environmental assessment or project-performance assessment is represented.
Full source identifiers, hashes, retrieval envelope and reason codes remain in the two-page Evidence Pack.
Lausitz, Germany
Dated optical observations provide surface-visible context. Engineering completion, water quality and geotechnical condition cannot be determined from imagery.
German North Sea
Repeat-pass SAR provides dated surface-visible context. Bright radar targets do not by themselves confirm individual asset identity, installation or condition.
SATELLITE ANALYSIS
See the change. Understand the context.
Repeated satellite measurements, geodata and analytical methods put a location into context.
Time. Coverage. Complementary signals.
Why satellite data mattersOptical observations
t1
t2
t3
t4
t5
t6
Radar · a complementary signal
r1
r2
r3
r4
r5
r6
ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE
A new perspective from Munich
A new district takes shape. Connect dated observations to a published milestone and the next review question.
Munich–Neufreimann
District crop, reprojected and resampled for display.
Governed boundary
A governed evidence workflow for accountable institutional review.
Data needs analysis and review before it can support a conclusion.
Purpose, identity, permission and traceability remain attached before evidence is packaged.
Versioned Evidence Pack
Project and portfolio context
EO and approved external sources
Specialist inputs with traceability
Target design: institutional roles, evidence and review actions remain separate. Operational deployment is subject to institution-specific validation.
Incubation and technology programmes.
Historical programme
EY Startup Academy Frankfurt 2025
Completed by 3BrainAI Solutions company history
Founder contextDusan Prikryl
Built from both sides of accountability.
Dusan Prikryl founded 3BrainAI after working on both the physical and digital sides of accountability.
His experience spans owner-side responsibility for complex physical assets and later digital products, data operations, analytics and AI.
Historical experience context, not CRI deployments or product outputs.
Read the founder and company contextMeasurement before promises
Test the value in a real review.
In an agreed pilot, we will examine how CRI supports bank reviewers: preparing evidence, identifying the next action and explaining how a conclusion was reached.
No result is asserted here.Preparation time
Compare the time needed to assemble and review the relevant evidence.
Useful follow-up
Assess whether the record helps reviewers identify a clear, appropriate next action.
Traceability
Check how easily another reviewer can follow a finding back to its sources.