3분으로 보는 Gottlieb.
가상의 스티어 바이 와이어 액추에이터가 게이트를 거칩니다. 문서 43종, 하나의 그래프, 그리고 어느 두 문서를 맞대 봐도 보이지 않고 연결 고리 위에서만 드러나는 지적사항 하나. 이를 나중에 발견하면 어떤 대가를 치르는지까지.
- 0:04
무엇이 들어오는가
43가지 문서 유형, 8개 분야. 모든 문서가 서로 일치해야 합니다.
- 0:46
어떻게 검증하는가
코드가 읽고, 108개 에이전트가 판단하고, 그래프가 연결하고, 1만 개의 규칙이 교차 검증합니다. 결정은 엔지니어가 합니다.
- 1:12
어떻게 그래프가 되는가
두 문서씩 맞대 보면 모두 통과합니다. 연결 고리를 따라가면 아닙니다. 위험 등급이 이미 사라진 형상으로 시험한 결과에 기대고 있습니다.
- 1:49
무엇이 나오는가
승인 불가. 지적사항 14건, 모두 해당 페이지가 인용된 채 다섯 가지 보고서로.
- 2:07
지식 그래프
모든 패키지가 물어볼 수 있는 그래프가 됩니다. 프로그램, 공장, 공급업체, 부품까지.
- 2:22
변경 영향
구성 9개, 캐리오버 모듈 4개, 공장 3곳. 몇 분 만에 파악됩니다.
- 2:33
캐리오버 재검증
모듈 6개 중 4개가 구 아키텍처 기준의 승인을 그대로 들고 신 아키텍처에 들어왔습니다.
- 2:44
마무리
같은 빈틈도 단계가 늦어질수록 비용은 열 배씩 불어납니다.
Gottlieb. Engineering AI for the built world.
Before a part is released for series production, your team or a supplier prepares up to forty-three document types, across eight disciplines. From design specifications, to functional safety, and all the way to the production process. Every one of them has to agree with every other one. Three are missing here. And every one of them is dense. A detail drawing: every dimension and tolerance, and one note that makes a radius critical. Seven sheets. A design FMEA: failure modes, causes and controls, nested three levels deep. Twenty-eight sheets. A test report: four hundred measurements against the limit line. Forty-four pages. Every change has to reach every document. That is where gaps can hide.
Here is how we check it. Code pulls out every value. AI reads what code cannot: drawings, scans, prose. One hundred and eight agents judge the facts, across eight lifecycle gates. Code links every fact into one graph. And cross-checks it against ten thousand written rules, in five layers. Director agents set the verdict. A separate check audits it. Your engineer decides. Same package, same answer, every time.
Now the hard part. It starts with the drawing. AI reads it into facts, and the facts become a node. The risk analysis and the fatigue test, read the same way. Three nodes, one graph. The drawing changed in May. The risk analysis still rates it low risk, because the fatigue test passed. Check any two documents against each other, and every pair passes. Walk the chain, and the rating rests on a test of samples built before the change. A geometry that no longer exists. That gap lives on the chain, not on any pair. The graph finds it, with three page numbers.
The result: not approved. Fourteen findings, five critical, three documents missing, and the wrong submission level. Every finding cited to its page, in five reports: for the supplier, the engineer, the auditor, and the board. The engine prepares. The engineer decides.
Next: every package becomes a knowledge graph you can ask. Programmes, plants, suppliers, parts, requirements. Nobody maintains it. It is built from the evidence you just saw checked. Now ask it the questions that matter.
A change comes in on the motor. What does it touch? Nine configurations on a second programme, four carryover modules, three plants. Known in minutes, before the change is released.
Which carryover modules entered the new architecture on an approval written for the old one? Four of six. The parts did not change. Their validity did. Re-qualification computed from what changed underneath.
The same gap costs ten times more at every later stage. Found before the start of production, the part and its production process can be adjusted.
Gottlieb. Engineering AI for the built world.