Overview

SWANK::AI provides independent ethical and structural analysis of AI systems for organisations and individuals who require clear, defensible frameworks for understanding risk, impact, and decision-making within AI systems.

The work is analytical and explanatory in nature, with a focus on how systems operate in practice rather than how they are presented or intended to function.

When SWANK::AI Is Engaged

SWANK::AI works with clients where AI systems are:

  • producing unfair, harmful, unstable, or disproportionate outcomes
  • subject to scrutiny from users, boards, regulators, or the public
  • being designed or deployed without sufficient ethical safeguards
  • escalating risk, opacity, or harm rather than managing it

Engagements typically arise where clarity is needed in contested, sensitive, or high-stakes contexts.

Role and Orientation

The role of SWANK::AI is to act as an independent second opinion.

This includes identifying and documenting:

  • structural risks and failure modes
  • bias pathways and unequal impact
  • escalation and oversight weaknesses
  • gaps between stated intent and operational behaviour

Analysis is documented clearly and proportionately, without alignment to commercial, reputational, or institutional interests.

Typical Engagements

SWANK::AI supports clients through:

Independent Ethical & Structural AI Reviews
External analysis of system structure, decision logic, escalation pathways, and foreseeable harm.

Bias and Harm Mapping
Identification of structural bias, unequal impact, and risk amplification within AI outputs or processes.

Documentation for Oversight or Complaints
Written analysis suitable for internal governance, boards, regulators, or formal review contexts.

Short-Form Analytical Reviews
Scoped, time-limited reviews addressing specific questions or concerns where a full audit would be disproportionate.

How SWANK::AI Works

  • Independent and non-aligned
  • Fixed-scope engagements agreed in advance
  • All work documented in writing
  • No certification, endorsement, or regulatory sign-off
  • Analysis only — not legal, compliance, or enforcement advice

The focus is clarity, proportionality, and accountability.

Who This Is For

SWANK::AI is suitable for:

  • organisations facing ethical, governance, or reputational risk from AI systems
  • developers or founders seeking an independent review before or after deployment
  • lawyers, NGOs, or institutions requiring external ethical analysis
  • researchers or teams working within contested or sensitive AI use cases

Who This Is Not For

SWANK::AI does not provide:

  • legal advice or regulatory certification
  • compliance sign-off or approval
  • marketing endorsements
  • litigation testimony without prior engagement

Leadership and Independence

SWANK::AI is led by Polly Chromatic, an independent researcher with advanced training in human development, social justice, psychology, and computer science, and professional experience in ethical and structural AI analysis.

The work is grounded in:

  • independent, non-aligned analysis
  • clear documentation suitable for oversight and review
  • proportional, non-escalatory risk framing

SWANK::AI operates without commercial alignment to vendors, platforms, or deployers.
This independence is deliberate and central to the work.

What This Means for Clients

  • Analysis is not influenced by product, reputational, or institutional objectives
  • Findings are documented clearly and defensibly
  • Engagements focus on system behaviour in practice, not theory or intent
  • Outputs are suitable for boards, institutions, lawyers, NGOs, and researchers

Important Boundaries

SWANK::AI:

  • does not certify, approve, or endorse AI systems
  • does not provide legal or regulatory advice
  • does not offer compliance sign-off

All services are analytical and non-directive in nature.

What Working With SWANK::AI Looks Like

Most engagements are limited, time-bound reviews of a specific AI system, document set, or concern.

Work is scoped in advance, delivered in writing, and concludes when the agreed analysis is complete.

No ongoing commitment is assumed.

For a description of available services and engagement boundaries, see Services.

For an explanation of how analysis is conducted, see Methodology.

Scroll to Top