What we show.
What we are not promising.
This page distinguishes between the experience of the site, the statements about the core and what needs to be verified before an operational project.
A browsable site.
Not the system in operation.
Navigation, site search, application filters, guided readings, PDF documents, the checklist and preparing and sending the first conversation all work. There is no AI assistant, file upload or forum.
The examples are editorial content. No simulations are run, no indicators are calculated on real data and no decision is made.
An acceptance test of the core
has a precise scope.
The COGI.CO project describes the core as an executable specification and reports an acceptance test on synthetic data, offline, dated 1 October 2026. This site repeats that statement without presenting it as independent verification.
It does not follow that the whole service is installable, validated in a client’s environment or effective on a real process. These are separate checks.
The pilot starts
with a verifiable proposal.
Scope, duration, availability of components, people involved, data, hosting, dependencies, deliverables, verification criteria, costs and responsibilities need a shared definition before launch.
This site does not publish prices, deadlines or unvalidated quantitative results. It does not attribute undocumented certifications or guarantees to the project.
Useful documents.
With their status on the cover.
Technical pre-assessment sheet.
An editorial summary with the questions to be completed in the actual configuration. Not a declaration of compliance.
Decision dossier.
The waiting-list example, with no real data. It shows the shape of the report, not results achieved.
Which decision
do you want to tackle?
Tell us about the process, not the solution. The first conversation is about understanding whether, and where, COGI can be useful.
Start a conversation