Node16.ai / Papers

Our work

Papers, research
and presentations

The thinking behind Node16.ai, what we have built and what our experiments show.

Presentation · NVIDIA FLARE Day 2026

Catching cross-bank
money laundering

Public slides updated 23 September 2026

Our work on federated graph learning was presented at NVIDIA FLARE Day 2026. The talk covers learning across banks that keep their data separate, pseudonymous counterparties and lessons from building on sovereign GPU infrastructure.

The slides include our verified synthetic results. The results section below sets out the comparison and the investigation-workload trade-off.

Published research · HICSS-59, 2026

Agentic AI for Financial
Crime Compliance

Research on designing agentic compliance workflows with bounded roles, traceable decisions and explainability. The paper draws on a fintech prototype and examines how accountable governance can support automation across compliance work.

Read the published paper ↗

Proceedings of the 59th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

Research article · Under peer review

Sovereign AI governance

A research paper on the governance of distributed AI systems is currently under peer review.

Further details will be shared after the review process.

Technical overview

Coming shortly

Detailed architecture, methods and evaluation evidence.

Our experiments · Results verified 17 September 2026

Make investigation capacity count.

A useful detector has to balance what it finds with what a team can investigate. In our synthetic experiments, shared learning improved detection for all five simulated banks. These results come from synthetic data with a dense transaction network between the banks; real-bank performance is what we test next with partner banks.

All fiveSimulated banks improved with shared learning
98–99%Of alerts relevant in a focused queue
About 3 in 4Suspicious transactions caught with broad coverage

At 1,000 alerts per million transactions

98.4–99.5%

of alerts were labelled suspicious

That is approximately 5–16 false alerts per 1,000 alerts across the five simulated banks.

This queue recovered 23.2–35.5% of all labelled suspicious transactions. Selecting a smaller queue leaves more suspicious activity outside it.

The alert budget sets the trade-off

Shared model, ranges across five simulated banks
Transactions flaggedPrecisionRecall
0.1%98.4–99.5%23.2–35.5%
0.5%42.7–64.4%75.2–77.4%

Precision is the share of alerts labelled suspicious. Recall is the share of all labelled suspicious transactions recovered. These are transaction alerts, before grouping them into cases or reports. What this means for your team →

Sonar provides the detection signal. Investigator brings it together with graph exploration, KYC context and case evidence, so the investigator can assess the activity and prepare the next step. Investigation and reporting decisions stay with the bank.

How this experiment was evaluated

The run used four retained investigation windows per simulated bank, drawn from our synthetic corpus of approximately 4 billion transactions and 4 million customers, covering 187 money-laundering typologies. The corpus scale is distinct from the selected training and evaluation windows. All five simulated banks ran on one sovereign compute host.

Local and shared graph models used matched bank-local inputs. The shared model's precision–recall ranking improved over the local model for all five simulated banks. Thresholds were selected on development validation; some input signals reflect patterns built into the synthetic generator. The public presentation slides 5 and 10 report the same comparison, and the technical overview will carry the training rounds, hardware, metrics and thresholds.

Further reading

Research and perspectives
that inform our work

Selected external work on collaborative detection, synthetic data and accountable AI. These publications report their own methods and findings.