What the model is

Not a chat layer over a solver. A learned model of the fields, trained on physics we generate, and fast enough that exploring a design space becomes a search instead of a handful of guesses.

FULL-WAVE LABELS

Trained on physics, not text

Every label comes from a solver we run ourselves, drawn to cover the designs people actually build.

E H ANY POINT, ANY PORT

Answers the question you ask

A field at a point, a response between ports, a figure of merit over a band. One model, whatever the question needs.

TARGET THOUSANDS SCORED · SIX SOLVED

Fast enough to search

Milliseconds per candidate where a solve is minutes to hours. That is what turns exploration from intuition into a search.

Design space exploration, run by agents

An agent takes the spec, proposes changes across the whole system, scores them on the model, and sends only the survivors to the solver. What comes back is a ranked set of proposals with physics behind every number.

You stop searching with the solver and start checking with it.

A full-wave solve is minutes to hours, so exploration gets rationed to a handful of candidates picked by intuition. Scoring thousands changes which designs you consider at all — and nothing ships on a prediction alone.

run 0417 · 0.75 V core railverdict.json

00:00 → read_system die · package · board · VRM

00:01 → propose decap, vias, cap regions, crossover

00:02 → model_sweep 2,048 variants

00:06 package-only fix misses 10 MHz — dropped

00:07 → promote top 5 → solver

01:38 3 proposals ranked · one change per team

Agents propose

An agent reads the spec and the system as built, then proposes variants at every level — die, package, board, regulator — not just the layer whose file you happen to own.

The model scores

Thousands of variants are scored in the time a solver takes for one. Dead ends are dropped early, and infeasible specs are called before anyone spends a solve on them.

Physics confirms

Survivors are re-run through the real toolchain, and the numbers in a proposal are the solver’s, never the model’s. The agent can edit the design, never the checks.

Design partners open

Four design spaces

The same model and the same agents, pointed at four problems. Each takes a spec you already write down and returns a verdict saying which lines are met, on what evidence.

INSET-FED PATCH BAND TARGET MATCH vs FREQUENCY

Antenna

Planar antennas with the laminate free to change, since it is often the substrate that decides whether a spec is reachable. Bring the band, match, gain and envelope; get a geometry and feed with a verdict on every spec line, and impossible specs called early.

DECOUPLED RAIL BEFORE AFTER TARGET IMPEDANCE vs FREQUENCY

Power delivery

A rail from regulator to die, closed against a target impedance and a droop budget rather than a rule of thumb about decap counts. Bring the stack and the target; get ranked proposals naming what the die, package and board each change, with the solver behind every number.

PAIR THROUGH A VIA MASK EYE AT THE RECEIVER

Signal integrity

High-speed channels end to end: the stackup, the via transitions and the routing that decide whether the eye is open at the receiver. Bring the data rate and the stackup you can build; get a routed channel and a verdict on loss, crosstalk and eye margin.

COUPLED RESONATORS PASSBAND TARGET RESPONSE vs FREQUENCY

RF front ends

Distributed filters, couplers and matching networks synthesised against a response instead of tuned by hand. Bring the passband, rejection and the area you can spend; get a layout and a verdict on every line of the response, including where laminate tolerance eats the margin.

Struggling with long EM simulation times for your design?

Thirty minutes: the spec you are trying to close, and the constraint that keeps biting. We run it and show you what comes back, including where it falls short.

Send us the spec