Frequently Asked Questions

A structured engineering report showing the current asset condition, the main degradation or performance risks, the evidence behind each finding, and the recommended next actions. Typical output includes SoH calibration, plating or thermal risk indicators, yield gap attribution, fault reconstruction where relevant, and a short walkthrough with the client team.

Verify is usually scoped per site, with a standard engagement starting at S$4,800 for a defined review. One site means one physical asset location. Portfolio work, unusual data conditions, or additional reporting can be scoped separately, but most standard reviews fit the base structure.

Typical turnaround is five business days from clean data receipt. We confirm the submission first, flag any material gaps early, and then start the review clock once the dataset is workable.

Verify is designed to surface issues that are easy to miss in standard summary views: plating risk, capacity fade, charge profile stress, thermal precursors, yield shortfalls, and fault sequences that need a clearer timeline. The exact findings depend on the quality and depth of the telemetry available.

Yes. Verify is used for both BESS and solar assets. On the solar side, reviews usually focus on irradiance-normalised yield gaps, component underperformance, and likely causes such as shading, soiling, mismatch, or degradation. Co-located systems can be reviewed together where the operating context matters.

That is still useful. A clean report gives the owner an independent technical baseline and a documented view of current asset condition. It can also help internal teams, lenders, insurers, or counterparties align on the same operating picture.

Verify is a scoped review. Horizon is the continuous layer for teams that need ongoing monitoring after the baseline has been established. In practice, Verify explains what is happening now; Horizon is used when the operator wants persistent visibility and site-specific operating limits over time.

Usually yes. Horizon works best when it starts from a calibrated baseline rather than generic assumptions. Verify provides that baseline and helps confirm whether continuous monitoring is justified for the asset in question.

Horizon supports customer-controlled deployment paths, including on-site and controlled cloud arrangements. The right model depends on your security requirements, telemetry pathways, and operational setup. For sensitive environments, it can be deployed so raw signal processing stays within the customer perimeter.

Horizon can expose a lightweight interface for SoH, operating envelopes, alerts, and related monitoring outputs. Exact endpoints depend on the deployment and integration scope, but the goal is straightforward: give the customer control stack a clean way to consume the signals that matter.

Usually yes. Horizon is designed to work with common industrial telemetry paths and historian exports, and we confirm compatibility during scoping if a site uses proprietary formats or unusual vendor setups.

The standard starting set is raw or near-raw telemetry, a site-level historian or SCADA export, basic asset context, and irradiance data if solar is in scope. We confirm the exact minimum before the work starts so the client knows whether the dataset is sufficient.

Sizes vary widely by asset and sampling rate. Some reviews involve modest exports; others are several gigabytes. We provide a secure upload path suited to the volume rather than asking teams to push large files over email.

Often yes. Industrial data is rarely perfect, so the review process expects some gaps and irregularities. Where the missing data materially limits a conclusion, we say that directly and make the boundary explicit in the report.

Submitted telemetry is used only for the agreed review scope. We do not use customer data to train shared models. Managed workflows use encrypted transfer and storage, and deletion requests can be handled when required by the engagement.

Not if the deployment is structured that way. Horizon can be deployed so raw telemetry stays inside the customer environment, with external visibility limited to the summaries the customer chooses to expose.

We support deployment and contracting conversations with the relevant privacy and handling requirements in mind, including PDPA and, where applicable, GDPR-related terms. Where a DPA or deletion workflow is needed, we address that directly in scope rather than leaving it ambiguous.

Start with a short enquiry. We confirm the asset type, the available data, and whether the standard Verify scope fits. Once that is clear, we issue the secure submission instructions and begin the review from clean receipt.

Horizon is scoped case by case. In most situations the sequence is Verify first, then a technical review of deployment path, telemetry access, and operator requirements before a pilot is proposed.

Yes, for portfolio owners, operators, and O&M teams that need recurring review work or broader support. Those arrangements are scoped around fleet size, reporting needs, and operating cadence.

Yes. Reviews are often used in underwriting, diligence, internal investment review, and lender-facing technical work. Where the deliverable needs a specific structure, we can align the output to that decision process.