Skip to content
AsterMind AI — Intelligence into Action
Client impact

Banking & Financial Services

Detecting financial crime in real time without drowning analysts in false positives.

Rules-based transaction monitoring had grown for a decade. Each new typology added rules, each rule added alerts, and the investigation queue was permanently beyond capacity.

Client
Tier-1 retail and commercial bank
Region
Europe
Scale
Millions of daily transactions, 24/7 analyst desk

The challenge

What was actually going wrong.

  • Alert volumes exceeded what the financial-crime desk could investigate, so genuine risk sat behind noise.
  • Rules could not represent relationships between accounts, mules and counterparties.
  • Any model change had to be defensible to regulators before it could touch a decision.

The AI solution

How it was engineered.

Graph features and streaming models with analyst feedback captured into retraining.

01

Graph feature layer

Counterparty relationships modelled as a graph, producing ring, velocity and structuring features that a flat rule cannot express.

02

Streaming scoring

Models score in-flight on the streaming platform, with rules retained as a hard floor rather than replaced.

03

Explainability by design

Every score ships with contributing features and a plain-language rationale in the case record.

04

Analyst feedback loop

Investigation outcomes flow back as labels, so precision improves from the desk's own work.

Core bankingStreaming platformGraph storeCase managementModel registryEvidence archive

Delivery

The path to production.

Shadow mode for one quarter before decisioning authority.

  1. Weeks 1–3

    Discover

    Typology review, label archaeology, model risk classification with second line.

  2. One quarter

    Prove

    Full shadow mode against live traffic, side-by-side with the rules engine.

  3. Months 5–8

    Scale

    Decisioning authority granted per typology, staged by risk tier.

  4. Ongoing

    Operate

    Quarterly model validation, drift and fairness monitoring, audit evidence generated automatically.

The outcome

What changed, and how we know.

Material

Reduction in false positives

At equal detection, client-reported

1 qtr

Shadow mode before go-live

Regulator-visible evidence period

100%

Decisions with recorded rationale

Every score explainable

  • Analyst capacity moved from clearing noise to investigating genuine networks.
  • Detection held while the alert queue became workable within shift capacity.
  • Model governance artefacts are produced by the pipeline, not assembled before each audit.

“Shadow mode was non-negotiable. It is why the model went live at all.”

— Director, Financial Crime, Tier-1 bank (anonymised)

What is next Extend graph features to trade finance and onboarding risk scoring.

Start here

What should your enterprise be able to do next?

Tell us the outcome you want to achieve. We will help you identify, engineer and scale the right AI solution.

Start an AI conversation

We use your details only to respond to this enquiry. See our privacy notice.