Not part of a guided workflow —
Next best move:Open the platform atlas Atlas
AutoResilienceCommand
Ops clock2026-03-17 14:00ZFirst impactT−22.4h

BMW-targeted concept demonstration. Operational entities, suppliers, parts, inventory, production, financial values and incident conditions are synthetic and do not represent BMW systems, performance or current exposure.

Data Readiness Scorecard

Before exposure is calculated, the system states whether the data can support the decision. There is deliberately no single percentage.

INC-2026-0113 · S1 · responding

What this data can and cannot decide

AutoResilience demonstration dataset (Meridian Stamping)

The system can identify the exposed plants, lines and parts, decide whether to isolate the supplier connection. It cannot calculate time to shutdown — rates are present but some counts are older than one production day, so hours of cover are reported as estimates. It cannot count confirmed inbound supply as relief — inbound shipments lack confirmation or ETAs, so none of them can extend the countdown. It cannot decide whether an alternate source closes the shortage — alternate capacity claims are unqualified or never validated, so they cannot be relied on to close a shortage. It cannot defend the conclusion in a customer or audit review — dependency ownership or evidence currency is incomplete, so parts of the conclusion rest on unattributed data.

3 Decision ready3 Usable with limitations4 Material gap0 Not provided

Decision support

Each conclusion the product offers, and whether the imported data can carry it.

DecisionSupportedWhyDepends on
Identify the exposed plants, lines and partsSupportedEvery exposed part resolves to a supplier site and a consuming line, so the dependency path from the supplier to the plant is complete.Part-to-supplier mapping, Part-to-plant mapping
Calculate time to shutdownNot supportedRates are present but some counts are older than one production day, so hours of cover are reported as estimates.Consumption-rate availability, Inventory currency
Count confirmed inbound supply as reliefNot supportedInbound shipments lack confirmation or ETAs, so none of them can extend the countdown.Shipment certainty
Decide whether to isolate the supplier connectionSupportedSystems carry a business process and interfaces state their fallback maturity, so the operational cost of isolation can be stated.System and interface coverage
Decide whether an alternate source closes the shortageNot supportedAlternate capacity claims are unqualified or never validated, so they cannot be relied on to close a shortage.Alternate-source validation
Defend the conclusion in a customer or audit reviewNot supportedDependency ownership or evidence currency is incomplete, so parts of the conclusion rest on unattributed data.Dependency ownership, Evidence currency

Supplier coverage

Are the suppliers that matter present, with a cyber position on record?

Usable with limitations25 suppliers, 17 with a recorded assessment

Exposure can be traced for every supplier in the package. 68% carry a cyber score and assessment date, which is what allows a supplier to be pre-ranked before an incident.

2 named gaps
  • ▲Kessler Wire Systems: no current cyber assessment on record
  • ▲Aurelia Interiors: no current cyber assessment on record

Part-to-supplier mapping

Can each part be traced to the supplier and site that ships it?

Decision ready250 of 250 parts mapped to a supplier site

Site-level mapping is what makes a single-plant supplier outage different from a company-wide one. 100% of parts carry both supplier and shipping site.

No gaps recorded in this category.

Part-to-plant mapping

Is it known which plants and lines consume each part?

Decision ready10 of 10 exposed parts consumed on a named line

Without a part-to-line link the system can name an affected supplier but not an affected plant. This mapping is the minimum for any operational conclusion.

No gaps recorded in this category.

Inventory currency

Are the counts recent enough to calculate hours of cover?

Material gap4 of 13 exposed counts taken within 24 hours

A count older than one production day makes hours of cover an estimate rather than a verified fact. The system reports it as an estimate rather than adjusting the number.

9 named gaps
  • ▲27A-1000: count is 120h old (No inventory record found)
  • ▲14Z-1025: count is 168h old (Contract schedule A)
  • ▲14Z-1025: count is 72h old (Supplier questionnaire 2026-02-02)
  • ▲40Y-1050: count is 72h old (SAP S/4HANA MM extract 2026-03-14)
  • ▲99X-1075: count is 96h old (Contract schedule A)
  • ▲99X-1075: count is 96h old (MES routing master 2026-03-01)
  • ▲40W-1100: count is 144h old (SAP S/4HANA MM extract 2026-03-14)
  • ▲50S-1200: count is 192h old (Contract schedule A)
  • ▲98R-1225: count is 72h old (Integration register 2026-01-19)

Consumption-rate availability

Is the current consumption rate known for each exposed part?

Decision ready13 of 13 exposed part–line pairs have a rate

Time to shutdown is usable inventory divided by consumption. Where the rate is absent, the system reports the pair as not calculable — it does not substitute a planning rate.

No gaps recorded in this category.

Shipment certainty

Is inbound supply confirmed with an arrival time?

Material gap100 of 161 inbound shipments confirmed with an ETA

Only a confirmed shipment arriving before stock-out is counted as cover. Unconfirmed supply stays visible but never extends the countdown.

61 named gaps
  • ▲27A-1000: 1283 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲65I-1008: 1397 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲23L-1011: 786 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲39O-1014: 803 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲39O-1014: 1078 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲14Z-1025: 1174 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲10C-1028: 238 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲86D-1029: 311 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲52E-1030: 448 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲57G-1032: 555 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲29U-1046: 2631 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲17G-1058: 2422 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲71T-1071: 2422 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲24U-1072: 333 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲38Y-1076: 496 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲73E-1082: 2209 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲95G-1084: 862 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲12J-1087: 1227 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲55M-1090: 929 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲98O-1092: 1211 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲13S-1096: 1356 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲14F-1109: 1313 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲43I-1112: 1658 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲97J-1113: 851 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲27L-1115: 911 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲70Q-1120: 768 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲70Q-1120: 1513 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲95R-1121: 1587 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲49T-1123: 354 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲72K-1140: 905 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲33S-1148: 597 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲36B-1157: 1150 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲50C-1158: 353 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲97E-1160: 1006 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲58H-1163: 2240 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲33L-1167: 546 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲97N-1169: 1220 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲24Q-1172: 1115 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲92U-1176: 1304 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲36V-1177: 938 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲36G-1188: 1981 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲16H-1189: 857 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲63P-1197: 431 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲54U-1202: 864 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲63V-1203: 905 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲63V-1203: 672 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲12Y-1206: 233 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲43A-1208: 1266 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲50F-1213: 359 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲61G-1214: 521 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲40K-1218: 447 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲93L-1219: 1148 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲60T-1227: 1136 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲60T-1227: 491 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲10B-1235: 303 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲31F-1239: 743 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲36G-1240: 1313 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲77H-1241: 1048 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲98I-1242: 992 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲41J-1243: 907 units in transit with no confirmed ETA
  • ▲83N-1247: 349 units in transit with no confirmed ETA

System and interface coverage

Is it known which business process each system carries, and whether a manual fallback exists?

Usable with limitations20 systems, 30 interfaces, 19 with a stated fallback

This is what turns an SAP or EDI interruption into a production statement: the system carries a process, the process carries a transaction, the transaction releases the shipment.

6 named gaps
  • ▲PO replication: critical interface with no manual fallback recorded
  • ▲Sequenced pull signal: critical interface with no manual fallback recorded
  • ▲Sequenced pull signal (Saltillo): critical interface with no manual fallback recorded
  • ▲OT work order push: critical interface with no manual fallback recorded
  • ▲OT work order push (Paint): critical interface with no manual fallback recorded
  • ▲Partner tunnel — Meridian: critical interface with no manual fallback recorded

Alternate-source validation

Are second sources qualified, validated and capable of the volume?

Material gap4 alternates for exposed parts, 2 qualified and validated · 4 exposed single-source parts

An unvalidated capacity claim cannot close a shortage. The system compares stated daily capacity against actual consumption before recommending activation.

4 named gaps
  • ▲14Z-1025 via Belmont Die Casting: partial
  • ▲40Y-1050 via Weyland Forge: unqualified, capacity never validated
  • ▲99X-1075: single source with no alternate on record
  • ▲50S-1200: single source with no alternate on record

Dependency ownership

Does every relationship have a named owner, a source record and a validation state?

Material gap459 of 717 relationships validated with a named owner and source

Ownership is what makes a conclusion defensible in a customer review: each hop can be attributed to a person and a system record.

12 named gaps
  • ▲DEP-0006 (SUP-002 → SITE-006): stale, confidence 64%
  • ▲DEP-0012 (SUP-004 → SITE-012): unvalidated, confidence 63%
  • ▲DEP-0016 (SUP-006 → SITE-016): unvalidated, confidence 56%
  • ▲DEP-0017 (SUP-006 → SITE-017): stale, confidence 54%
  • ▲DEP-0018 (SUP-006 → SITE-018): unvalidated, confidence 71%
  • ▲DEP-0025 (SUP-009 → SITE-025): stale, confidence 67%
  • ▲DEP-0027 (SUP-010 → SITE-027): stale, confidence 64%
  • ▲DEP-0028 (SUP-010 → SITE-028): unvalidated, confidence 63%
  • ▲DEP-0029 (SUP-011 → SITE-029): unvalidated, confidence 72%
  • ▲DEP-0030 (SUP-011 → SITE-030): stale, confidence 59%
  • ▲DEP-0037 (SUP-015 → SITE-037): unvalidated, confidence 68%
  • ▲DEP-0040 (SUP-016 → SITE-040): unvalidated, confidence 69%

Evidence currency

Is the supporting evidence current and validated?

Usable with limitations7 of 8 evidence records current and validated

Evidence supports the conclusion an executive signs. Superseded or unvalidated records are shown as such rather than counted as proof.

1 named gap
  • ▲Belmont alternate-source qualification: superseded