Sandbox profile

Branch procedure answers

Low intensity

Branch staff ask the procedure manual in plain language. Customer account numbers are not a training feature, and the model does not approve a transaction.

Vertical
Fintech and banking
Scale
Small company
Organization
River & Pine Bank
Shape
Community bank, about $1.2B in assets, 11 branches.

The business problem

The procedure manual is long, the search is literal, and people paste questions that include an account number into whatever chat box is handy. The bank wants answers from the manual only, on a host in its data center, with a redaction step that refuses to send an account number to the model log in the clear.

What Grae SI recommends

Family

Qwen 2.5 1.5B or Phi-4 mini

Size

About 1.5B–3B, CPU or a single small GPU.

Why this size

This is grounded Q&A over a few hundred pages of procedures. A small model with retrieval is enough. A larger model increases the chance it answers from memory instead of the manual. No fine-tune until retrieval misses a target the ops team cares about.

License

Accepted by the bank’s vendor-management person before install. Recorded on the card.

Data controls

Customer data

The manual should not contain customer data. Staff questions might. Account numbers, SSNs, and card numbers are redacted before the prompt is stored.

De-identification

There is no customer-level training set in the first release. If a later fine-tune uses tickets, those tickets are stripped of direct identifiers first.

Access

Branch role and operations. The model does not query core banking.

Residency

The data center the bank already uses for core adjacent systems. No SaaS prompt log.

Retention

Questions kept 30 days for abuse review, with identifiers redacted, then deleted. The manual version is kept with the model version.

Risk classification

Intensity is a planning tier for evidence. It is not a certification and not a regulatory classification.

  • The corpus is the procedure manual. The model does not see the core, does not recommend a credit decision, and does not move money.
  • The tier stays low only while those limits hold. A question that arrives with a full customer profile is rejected, not answered.
  • If operations later asks the model to suggest a SAR or a credit exception, re-profile it. That use is high.

Compliance requirements to prepare for

FFIEC guidance and GLBA

The control is the same one the bank already applies to internal systems that could see customer data: access, logging, and vendor oversight. This host is internal, so the vendor file is about the base-model license, not a data processor.

SR 11-7 style model risk

A procedure chatbot is at the light end of model risk if it cannot affect a customer outcome. The bank’s model-risk policy may still want a short approval. Grae SI’s low-tier report is that short packet.

SOC 2 or ISO/IEC 27001

As the bank’s own program already defines. Not a new certification.

UDAAP

Out of scope while the model never talks to a customer. Put that in the intended use so a later chatbot on the website is a new review.

Grae SI helps assemble the evidence. It does not certify HIPAA, FDA, ISO, SOC 2, ICH, NAIC, GDPR, DPDP, or any other framework.

Validation KPIs

These are targets to lock before go-live. They are not measured outcomes from a customer deployment.

Manual grounding

At least 90% of answers quote a current manual section on a 80-question set

Ungrounded answers are the defect.

Account-number refusal

100% of prompts with a test account number are redacted or refused

Staff will paste them.

No core action

No tool exists that can post a transaction. Confirmed by design review.

A KPI on absence. The architecture is the control.

Stale manual

Answers cite the manual version, and a new manual forces a re-index before the old one is served

A retired fee schedule is a customer-harm risk even in an internal tool.

Deployment architecture

DeploymentBank data center, no route from the model to the core

The manual is indexed on a small host. The core banking network is not reachable from that host. Redaction runs in front of the prompt log.

  1. 01

    Procedure manual

    Versioned. Owned by operations.

  2. 02

    Redaction

    Account numbers and SSNs stripped from the question before it is logged.

  3. 03

    Small runtime

    llama.cpp on CPU, or a small GPU if ops wants faster answers.

  4. 04

    Branch page

    Cites the section. Does not open a customer record.

Each box is a component in the customer’s network. Arrows are the order of the path, read left to right on a wide screen and top to bottom on a phone.

Where this sits in the stack

The same ten layers appear on every profile. The mark says whether Grae SI provides the layer, shares it, or leaves it with you. Person-weeks are the buyer’s effort after the runtime is deployed, not a project plan for the whole company.

  • Grae SI providesGrae SI provides the layer
  • SharedShared. Grae SI supports part of it.
  • You ownYou own the layer after install
  1. Layer 1

    Infrastructure and compute

    You own

    Inside the bank’s existing private cloud account, or on a host in the data center.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 1–3 person-weeks

  2. Layer 2

    Data ingestion and prep

    Shared

    A checklist of what to collect, a sample upload, and a readiness score. The pipeline from the system of record into an approved extract.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 2–5 person-weeks

  3. Layer 3

    Data controls and governance

    Shared

    Account numbers are masked before any fine-tune. GLBA access reviews stay with the bank.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 1–3 person-weeks

  4. Layer 4

    Model selection and training

    Shared

    Grae SI packages the small model and the job. The first release may not fine-tune at all. The index of the manual is the bank’s.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 0.5–1.5 person-weeks

  5. Layer 5

    Evaluation and validation

    Shared

    Low-tier suite plus the grounding set and the account-number probe.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 0.5–1.5 person-weeks

  6. Layer 6

    Agents and orchestration

    Shared

    Compliance agents that classify the use case and name the frameworks to prepare for. Any production agent that calls tools inside your applications.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 1–2 person-weeks

  7. Layer 7

    Deployment and serving

    Grae SI provides

    Safetensors, GGUF, a model card, and an offline bundle for Ollama, vLLM, or llama.cpp. Moving that bundle into the zone and keeping the host patched.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 0.5–1.5 person-weeks

  8. Layer 8

    Monitoring and drift

    Shared

    Review refused prompts monthly. That is a person, not a new platform.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 0.5–1 person-weeks

  9. Layer 9

    Application and integration

    You own

    An internal page. No core integration, on purpose.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 1–3 person-weeks

  10. Layer 10

    Organizational validation and sign-off

    You own

    Operations and compliance sign a one-page intended use.

    Buyer effort after the runtime is up: 0.5–1.5 person-weeks

Buyer effort for this profile

2–4 person-weeks

This is the small-bank shape: a manual, a small model, and a written limit on what it may not do.

  • Operations
  • Compliance or vendor management
  • The infrastructure admin

Quantitative benefits

Illustrative estimate for this sandbox. It is not a measured customer result. Assumptions for this profile are listed under the figures.

Time to a reviewable package

2–3 weeks

No fine-tune, no core integration.

Cost versus a cloud API

About $400–$1,200 a month avoided

Illustrative: 11 branches, steady internal use. The policy win is that account numbers never leave the data center.

Compute

Under $100 a month, often a VM they already have

CPU inference for a 1.5B–3B model is realistic at branch-question volume.

Time to an answer

A few minutes saved versus hunting the PDF

Illustrative. If the manual is already well searched, the gain is smaller.

Accuracy target

90% grounded in the current manual

Gold-set target before staff rely on it.

Assumptions

  • Illustrative estimate for this sandbox. It is not a measured customer result.
  • No customer-facing use and no connection to core banking.
  • A later credit or SAR assistant is a new profile with a high tier.
  • Low tier depends on the redaction control actually running. If it is off, re-classify.

All sandbox profiles · The full stack