CSV Fountain · OPPORTUNITY EVIDENCE + PRELIMINARY CONTROLLED FIELD EVIDENCE

AI Performance & Benefit Evidence

Measured performance, AI-identified opportunity, actions and verified outcomes.

CURRENT FIELD STATUS

ONLINE

Last field telemetry: 2026-09-11T14:05:30.152618+05:30

Current field telemetry is reachable and fresh.

HISTORICAL EVIDENCE AVAILABILITY

Controlled optimisation history: AVAILABLE

Quality-qualified daily flow history: NOT YET PERSISTED

Evidence period:: 2026-08-12 to 2026-08-20
Last field telemetry:: 2026-09-11T14:05:30.152618+05:30
Data coverage:: 4 controlled field tests · 2 benefit demonstrated
Evidence class:: MEASURED

Controlled field-test evidence is available. Quality-qualified historical ZTEK flow evidence is not yet persisted in the cloud. Historical source: Pilot 1 edge archive.

REPEATED CONTROLLED FIELD EVIDENCE

2 BENEFIT-DEMONSTRATION TESTS

98.1%

AVERAGE MEASURED WATER DELIVERY MAINTAINED

10.7%

AVERAGE REDUCTION IN VFD-REPORTED MOTOR LOADING

PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE

Across 2 qualifying controlled field tests, AI-Kit maintained 98.1% of measured water delivery on average while VFD-reported motor loading was 10.7% lower on average. Results remain preliminary.

Qualifying controlled tests

20 Aug 2026

BENEFIT DEMONSTRATED

Recommended frequency: 33 Hz

98.3% measured water delivery maintained · 7.9% lower VFD-reported motor loading

12 Aug 2026

BENEFIT DEMONSTRATED

Recommended frequency: 32.5 Hz

97.9% measured water delivery maintained · 13.5% lower VFD-reported motor loading

Excluded tests

19 Aug 2026

ABORTED

Control fault · Excluded from aggregate

15 Aug 2026

INCONCLUSIVE

Solar variation prevented reliable comparison · Excluded from aggregate

Long-term VERIFIED AI BENEFIT: NOT YET ESTABLISHED.

OBSERVED PERFORMANCE

Measured electrical performance available when telemetry is current

AI OPPORTUNITY IDENTIFIED

AI frequency opportunity requires a comparable valid-flow window

VERIFIED AI BENEFIT

NOT YET ESTABLISHED

Last 10 Days — Benefit Evidence

Up to 10 recent calendar days supported by authoritative history. Missing days are not fabricated.

Evidence period:: 2026-08-12 to 2026-09-11
Days with valid evidence:: 4/10
Coverage:: 40%

Date	Operating Hours	Observed Performance	Expected Performance	AI / Test Action	Outcome	Evidence Result
11 Sept 2026	—	— UNAVAILABLE Measured flow absent; estimated flow retained separately and not substituted	— UNAVAILABLE No authoritative expected-flow value supplied	Review AI frequency recommendation: 33.5 Hz NOT APPLIED · RECOMMENDED	— UNAVAILABLE No comparable expected-flow window Opportunity cannot be quantified from one instantaneous sample.	UNAVAILABLE Why? / Evidence VFD frequency and electrical telemetry are measured. Measured flow is not replaced by the available estimate. Estimated flow (136.43636363636364 LPM) remains separate from measured evidence. Frequency-write capability has been validated, but this record does not prove that an AI action was executed. Remote START/STOP is not represented as verified. AI recommendation Review AI frequency recommendation: 33.5 Hz Actually executed? No What happened afterward? No qualifying before/after outcome evidence Data quality No valid NORMAL measured-flow evidence is available for a quantitative daily claim. Confidence basis 90% · Existing AI recommendation confidence; not benefit verification
20 Aug 2026	—	33.5 Hz · 194.6 LPM · 75.5% motor load MEASURED Pilot 1 historical VFD/operating data and quality-qualified ZTEK flow	33 Hz · 191.3 LPM · 69.5% motor load MEASURED Controlled optimisation comparison	Controlled test: 33.5 Hz → 33 Hz APPLIED · INTERVENTION	98.3% water maintained · 7.9% lower VFD-reported motor loading MEASURED 75.5% → 69.5% motor loading; 194.6 → 191.3 LPM 98.3% water maintained during the controlled setpoint comparison.	BENEFIT DEMONSTRATED Why? / Evidence Measured water delivery was maintained while VFD motor loading was reduced under comparable solar conditions. PRELIMINARY CONTROLLED FIELD EVIDENCE Historical source: Pilot 1 edge archive AI recommendation Controlled test: 33.5 Hz → 33 Hz Actually executed? Yes — execution evidence recorded What happened afterward? 98.3% water maintained · 7.9% lower VFD-reported motor loading Data quality Comparable controlled field evidence.
19 Aug 2026	—	Controlled test record MEASURED Pilot 1 historical VFD/operating data and quality-qualified ZTEK flow	Reliable comparison unavailable UNAVAILABLE Controlled optimisation comparison	Controlled test aborted after control fault NOT APPLIED · INTERVENTION	— UNAVAILABLE Controlled optimisation history No headline benefit contribution.	ABORTED Why? / Evidence Control fault and known transient UNDER/0 issue. No benefit/loss headline contribution. Historical source: Pilot 1 edge archive AI recommendation Controlled test aborted after control fault Actually executed? No What happened afterward? No qualifying before/after outcome evidence Data quality Control fault and known transient UNDER/0 issue.
15 Aug 2026	—	Measured baseline: 202.6 LPM MEASURED Pilot 1 historical VFD/operating data and quality-qualified ZTEK flow	Reliable comparison unavailable UNAVAILABLE Controlled optimisation comparison	Controlled comparison attempted NOT APPLIED · INTERVENTION	— UNAVAILABLE Controlled optimisation history No headline benefit contribution.	INCONCLUSIVE Why? / Evidence Solar irradiance varied too much during the test for a reliable frequency comparison. No benefit/loss headline contribution. Historical source: Pilot 1 edge archive AI recommendation Controlled comparison attempted Actually executed? No What happened afterward? No qualifying before/after outcome evidence Data quality Solar variation prevented reliable comparison.
12 Aug 2026	—	33.5 Hz · 243.7 LPM · 86% motor load MEASURED Pilot 1 historical VFD/operating data and quality-qualified ZTEK flow	32.5 Hz · 238.6 LPM · 74.4% motor load MEASURED Controlled optimisation comparison	Controlled test: 33.5 Hz → 32.5 Hz APPLIED · INTERVENTION	97.9% water maintained · 13.5% lower VFD-reported motor loading MEASURED 86% → 74.4% motor loading; 243.7 → 238.6 LPM 97.9% water maintained during the controlled setpoint comparison.	BENEFIT DEMONSTRATED Why? / Evidence Measured water delivery was maintained while VFD motor loading was reduced under comparable solar conditions. PRELIMINARY CONTROLLED FIELD EVIDENCE Historical source: Pilot 1 edge archive AI recommendation Controlled test: 33.5 Hz → 32.5 Hz Actually executed? Yes — execution evidence recorded What happened afterward? 97.9% water maintained · 13.5% lower VFD-reported motor loading Data quality Comparable controlled field evidence.

Evidence classifications

MEASURED: Direct field sensor, VFD or RMS telemetry.
MODELLED: Calculated from an existing trained or authoritative model.
ESTIMATED: Indirectly calculated because direct instrumentation is absent.
VERIFIED: Outcome supported by an executed intervention and before/after evidence.
DATA REVIEW: Anomaly, inconsistency or insufficient data makes the result unsuitable for a benefit claim.
UNAVAILABLE: Required evidence does not exist.

Opportunity is never counted as verified benefit unless an intervention was executed and supported by before/after outcome evidence.