Orbyfy Earthflow™
Live demo ↗ White paper ↗ Earthflow Underground 1 / 27
Earthflow Underground

A Physics AI living digital twin for primary medium-voltage underground distribution.

Every segment scored. Every score auditable back to the inputs behind it — measured or imputed. Earthflow Underground is a solution for Underground Cable Health.

The Solution — value delivered
1
Condition

A health score on every segment, with remaining useful life and a confidence band.

2
Capacity bottlenecks

Where headroom runs out — before the new load arrives to find it.

3
Where to test next

Rank segments for partial discharge and tan δ, instead of testing on the calendar.

4
Where to underground

Which corridors buy the most risk reduction per mile of spend.

Live twin Earthflow Underground twin — SF Bay Area network with per-segment failure probability, priority segments and layer controls
Earthflow Underground, running — SF Bay Area network, failure probability per segment
What we offer
Data as a service · scores delivered by API or export Agentic AI · ask the network in plain language One-way export · read-only extracts from your GIS, OMS, SCADA and AMI No new sensors · no rip-and-replace
Backed by & recognized
★ Edison Awards 2026 Gold EPRI AI for Power Finalist Black & Veatch IgniteX Siemens Next47 Start-up School NVIDIA Inception Boston Business Journal IDC Leader · Utility Solutions Techstars EnergyTech · Alabama Power Greentown Labs
The Vision for Earthflow Underground

A virtual sensor on every buried cable segment — updated every month.

You cannot put a sensor on miles and miles of buried cable. You can compute cable condition — for every segment, every month.

1
Instrument the invisible

A soft sensor on every buried segment — the first continuous record for condition, capacity, and environment, refreshed monthly for every mile.

2
Turn risk into a ranked list

The fleet's entire failure risk, ordered — top of the list to bottom, every segment with its probability, its remaining life, and its reason.

3
Ready for the load that's coming

Electrification lands on cable buried decades ago. See where headroom runs out — segment by segment, years ahead — and reinforce before the constraint arrives, not after it fails.

Live demo
Earthflow Underground, running — live product capture, modeled networks
The Problem

~1.1 million miles of underground distribution cable — and utilities cannot see any of it.

GIS only A distribution network as a utility holds it today: bare cable routes on satellite imagery, with every condition, sensor and environmental layer switched off
Your network today — routes, and nothing else
Condition unknown

Replaced on age, not evidence — and an underground fault costs 3–4× an overhead one to restore.

Capacity unknown

Headroom judged on nameplate ratings — while electrification and new load keep arriving.

Testing means an outage

VLF, tan δ and sheath integrity all need the segment de-energized. Most utilities test a fraction and run the rest to failure.

+5,000–10,000 miles a year are going underground. The blind spot in the power grid is growing.

That spend is regulator-approved and rate-recovered — FPL's Storm Secure Underground Program, Dominion's SUP, PG&E's plan. Every dollar has to survive a prudency review, where age alone is weak evidence.
The Hypothesis

A cable does not fail because of itself. It fails on electrical and environmental conditions — together.

ChemicalPoorly drained soil that eats the concentric neutral — the return path goes before the insulation does.
HydrologicFlood water sitting on splices; hot cable in chronically wet ground growing water trees.
ThermalHard loading in soil that traps heat.
ElectricalLightning entering at the riser — the overhead-to-underground transition is the surge's front door.
⚡ BURIED DISTRIBUTION CABLE ◆ splice joints water table pH 5.2Cl⁻ H₂OpH 6.8 ⚡ ELECTRICAL 🌍 ENVIRONMENTAL ⚛ FUSION
The physics of ageing

Cable condition is a complex electrical · thermal · chemical · mechanical problem, acting in combination — exactly what Physics AI is built for.
Physics builds each exposure per segment; your own outage history sets the weights.

PILC · paper-insulated, lead-covered
  • Corrosive soil attacks the lead sheath — moisture reaches the paper, and dielectric strength collapses.
XLPE · cross-linked polyethylene
  • Water treeing — moisture under electrical stress grows trees through the insulation until breakdown.
Earthflow Underground · At a Glance

Data outputs for every cable segment.

What we model
Voltage class
1–35 kV MV distribution — 12.47 kV systems, 15 & 25 kV insulation classes
Grid topology
Radial & open-loop URD — one-way power flow, urban and rural
Install & construction
Direct-buried & duct / conduit · riser transitions · 1Ø laterals & 3Ø mains · Cu / Al
Cable & accessories
XLPE · TR-XLPE · EPR · PILC · HMWPE · joints, splices & terminations as the failure target
The living twin — every segment scored, with its condition, capacity, dominant driver, and confidence band.
Outputs · per cable segment
Health Index 1–5 Probability of failure + band Remaining life (RUL) Dual-basis capacity & headroom Dominant failure driver Recommended action + reason Provenance & confidence band
50+ fields per segment · updated monthly · your formats — CSV · Parquet · GeoJSON · JSON / API · PDF / HTML
The Environmental Intelligence Layer

Earthflow powers granular geographic site intelligence — environmental perils on infrastructure. Acre by acre.

Running today Heat-map analysis view: a site divided into a grid of cells, with a long list of environmental analysis layers available down the side
Earthflow site heat-map analysis

70+ data sources · 200+ KPIs per location · 1,100+ data points per lat/long · 1,300 sites · 1M+ acres analysed

Physics AI
Earthflow Physics AI modules
A module family across the platform, plus the Earthflow Underground Physics module family · global coverage · answers in minutes, not months
What we fuse together
Utility data · four extracts
  • Asset registry · route & vintage
  • Outage history · 5–10 yr, the ground truth
  • Feeder loading · ≥1 yr, 15-minute
  • Meter intervals · de-identified load shape
Earthflow
Underground
Physics AI
Engine
Our environmental layer · fields per site
  • Soil chemistry · 26
  • Soil moisture · 44
  • Flood exposure · 49
  • Precipitation · 36
  • Ground movement · 24
  • Surface erosion · 60

Fused per segment — it resolves to your cable route, not a regional average.

Earthflow Underground Physics AI Engine

Cable physics per segment — and every segment knows itself.

Your data
Earthflow Data
Outage history

The training signal — 5–10 years of event-level records, the ground truth the weights are fitted to.

Asset registry + GIS

Where the cable actually runs — the geometry every physics exposure attaches to.

Loading

Feeder-head telemetry; meter intervals are the upgrade. The thermal and capacity driver.

Environmental layer

Resolved per segment — Earthflow Physics AI: the ground, water and surface conditions along the route. Already run across hundreds of thousands of acres of distribution territory.

Physics Engine
Modeling the physics of failure in underground cable systems.
ThermalElectricalChemicalMechanicalHydrological
Generalizes across global MV distribution networks 1–35 kV · up to 69 kV (optimizations required) ● Ready today Under 14 days to an MV network digital twin · program target
Output layer · per segment PoF Health Index RUL band Ratings & headroom Action + reason
How Earthflow Underground Works

We have modeled the physics of failure of underground cable systems.

1–35 kVRadial / open-loopOne-way power flow XLPETR-XLPEEPRPILC
The stresses the physics computes for every segment
Thermal agingLoad heat slowly cooks the insulation; hotter runs age it faster.
Insulation
Lightning surgeA strike on the overhead line sends a voltage wave down the riser.
Insulation
Chronic wet dutyWet, loaded insulation grows water trees that weaken it over years.
Insulation
Soil corrosionAggressive, wet soil eats the copper neutral wrapped around the cable.
Neutral
Water ingressFlooded vaults and ducts submerge the splices and terminations.
Joints
What scales the exposure
Scale of exposureHow much cable is in the ground, and how long it has been there.
fitted layer

Weighed together into one score. The fitted layer is deliberately thin — and it is fitted to your failure history, nothing else.

What you get, per segment
How likely is this segment to fail next, given it has survived to today?
Asked for every segment on your network, every run, using the conditions that segment actually sits in.
Valuethe probability itself
Uncertaintyhow sure we are, as a band around it
Provenancewhich inputs and sources drove it
No number leaves the engine without all three attached.

The physics is fixed and cited. The only fitted layer is thin, and it is fitted to your utility's own failure history.

Case Study · Head-to-Head

How does Earthflow Underground compare to incumbent modeling approaches?

Every model demo looks good. So we ran a head-to-head test. Earthflow Underground has been benchmarked against every publicly implementable alternative that exists today — two regulator methods, the academic peer-reviewed state of the art, and the age baseline. We lead all of them, across every dimension.

135–200%
better than CNAIM
~70%
better than Pattabi (2023)
98.9%
match to the true failure process

At the job that matters most: detecting the top-10% worst-ranked cables in the fleet.

Head-to-head Head-to-head benchmark results
2 US regions · 14,296 segments · 511 miles MV underground · 6 repetitions · identical protocol
Case Study · The Field

We compared Earthflow Underground against four other ways to rank a cable fleet.

Blind head-to-head.

Incumbent models VS Earthflow
Static formula Learned from physics
Random

The coin flip that anchors the scale.

Age only

The ranking most utilities run on today.

Past faults

Memorizes where failures happened — blind to first failures.

AER repex · AUS regulator

Survival curve on age — mathematically identical to an age rank.

CNAIM v2.1 · Ofgem

Age exponential × duty & location lookups × condition modifiers. Run in default and a generous +evidence arm.

Pattabi 2023 · academia

Peer-reviewed health index — eight parameters, fixed expert weights. The closest to us.

Earthflow Underground

Physics-built exposures; the weights fitted to your own outcomes.

The gap between the field and Earthflow is precisely this axis: fixed weights vs weights fitted to outcomes.

Case Study · The Proving Ground

We analyzed two distribution territories — segment by segment.

Greensboro NC Greensboro NC distribution territory in Earthflow Underground
Greensboro, NC
Austin TX Austin TX distribution territory in Earthflow Underground
Austin, TX — urban + rural
14,296 cable segments
1,300+ sq mi of territory
129 feeders · 43 substations
12.47 kV system voltage
15 / 25 kV-class cable · urban + rural
2 climates · San Francisco CA next
Vintages 1970–2015 · average age 24 yr · median install 1993 Modeled 100% direct-buried, radial MV — standard URD, one-way power flow
SCADA · loading

Real-pattern load profiles for one full year across both networks (DOE / NLR SMART-DS) — 15-minute profiles per feeder — establishing the year's duty profile.

OMS · outage log

A 10-year stress-tested simulated outage log — timestamps, cause codes, replacements — with its realism checked against 16 years of real UK (Ofgem) fault data and New Zealand's network disclosures.

Lightly loaded fleets — median duty 5–8% of planned rating — yet 500 segments run above 80% of rating, and 264 above 100%. This is the baseline every method was graded on, head to head.

Case Study · How We Tested

Every model studied 8 years.
Then had to predict the next 2 years of potential failures.

ANCHOR · real SCADA 1-year load profile drives every simulated year's duty — the same measured input for every model
2009
2018
Training · 8 years — every model fits here
Sealed
Frozen · Dec 31, 2016
Prediction date · Jan 1, 2017
8 years of outages, cause codes and duty
2017–18 · ~250 failures
graded blind
Earthflow tunes only 7 parameters
1 · failure rate 2 · aging curve 3 · corrosion 4 · thermal 5 · flood 6 · surge 7 · wet duty

The 10-year outage log is not taken on faith — its realism is checked against 16 years of real UK (Ofgem) fault records and New Zealand's 29 networks.

Case Study · The Ask

Each model was asked for the top-10% worst cable list.
Then we scored performance.

1
The ask

Rank the fleet. Hand in your top-10% shortlist — and for every segment on it:

RankPoFRULDriver
#19.2%0–0.2 yrlightning-riser
#28.7%0.3–1 yrthermal
#37.9%0.5–1.4 yrcorrosion
illustrative rows
2
Two years unfold

2017–18 plays out — ~250 segments actually fail per run. No model can react: every list is already frozen.

3
The count

How many of the real failures landed on each model's list? Scored per model — 6 repetitions, 2 regions, identical protocol.

Same fleet, same data, same deadline — the only difference was the model.

Case Study · Results — Top 10%

76% of the cables that failed were already on Earthflow's top-10% list.

% of failures captured in top-10% shortlist
Earthflow
76%
Pattabi 2023 (academic HI)
45%
CNAIM (default)
32%
CNAIM + evidence
25%
Age only
18%
AER repex curve (= age rank)
18%
Random (coin flip)
11%
random ≈ 10% goal 30%
Live twin · Greensboro Earthflow Underground segment record: failure probability, remaining life and dominant driver on a Greensboro circuit
A flagged segment's record — PoF, remaining life, dominant driver

Earthflow captured 76% of all cables that went on to fail in the two years after the prediction date — across both territories, Greensboro NC and Austin TX.

135–200% better than CNAIM · ~70% better than Pattabi 2023

Case Study · Results — The Top 10

Earthflow in action — we output the 10 worst cables.
Nine of them failed in the next 2 years.

RankInstalledDominant driver — the “why” Prior faultsPoF (2 yr)RUL bandOutcome · 2017–18
11995Thermal stress422>99%0–0.2 yr✕ FAILED · Feb 2017
21981Thermal stress95>99%0.1–0.6 yr✕ FAILED · May 2017
32007Lightning-surge (riser)792%0.3–1.2 yr✕ FAILED · Sep 2017
41980Thermal stress1885%0.3–1.5 yr✕ FAILED · Sep 2017
51991Lightning-surge (riser)2275%0.5–2.0 yr✕ FAILED · Feb 2017
61987Lightning-surge (riser)975%0.5–2.0 yr✕ FAILED · Nov 2017
71986Lightning-surge (riser)471%0.5–2.2 yr✕ FAILED · Oct 2017
81996Thermal stress1069%0.5–2.3 yr✕ FAILED · Apr 2017
92006Lightning-surge (riser)258%0.8–2.9 yr○ survived the window
102009Thermal stress556%0.8–3.0 yr✕ FAILED · Nov 2017

Rank 1 failed inside its 0–0.2-year band — and rank 9, the one survivor, is shown, not hidden.

Case Study · Results — The Harder List

Then we took away the failure history.
We still correctly identified 6 out of 10 that failed.

In a real network, ~96% of cable segments have little or no fault history — so we ranked only the low-history fleet: ≤2 prior faults, 14,239 segments across both regions. This is the population a history-based method cannot see at all.

RegionInstalledDominant driver — the “why” Prior faultsPoF (2 yr)RUL bandOutcome · 2017–18
Austin2014Lightning-surge (riser)281%1 yr (median)✕ FAILED
Greensboro2006Lightning-surge (riser)258%0.8–2.9 yr○ survived the window
Greensboro1982Chronic wet duty255%0.7–3.4 yr✕ FAILED · May 2017
Greensboro1993Chronic wet duty254%0.8–3.4 yr✕ FAILED · Dec 2017
Greensboro1999Lightning-surge (riser)253%0.8–3.6 yr✕ FAILED · Jan 2017
Austin1978Thermal stress052%2 yr (median)○ survived the window
Greensboro2005Chronic wet duty248%1.0–3.8 yr○ survived the window
Austin1976Thermal stress048%2 yr (median)✕ FAILED
Austin1973Thermal stress044%2 yr (median)○ survived the window
Austin1987Thermal stress244%2 yr (median)✕ FAILED

No failure precursors to lean on — ranked by physics alone, and six of the ten named in advance still failed within two years.

Case Study · Results — Consistency

How steady is each model, run to run?
Earthflow is the steadiest in the field.

Consistency — spread (σ) of lift@10 across repetitions · lower is better
Earthflow
0.19
Pattabi 2023 (academic HI)
0.50
Random (coin flip)
0.84
Age only
0.97
CNAIM + evidence
0.98
CNAIM (default)
1.54

A model that isn't reliable between repetitions of the same test can't be reliable in planning — a method that wins on average but swings run-to-run is hard to plan capital against.

Case Study · Results — Top 5%

The top 5% — what a real annual budget can actually dig.
Earthflow's shortlist holds 3–4× the future failures of any incumbent.

Times better than random at 5% — the harder test: the top-5% shortlist
Earthflow
13.9×
CNAIM (default)
5.1×
CNAIM + evidence
3.6×
Age only
2.0×
Random (coin flip)
1.0×
1.0 = random

When the budget only covers a handful of digs, this is the chart that matters: the digs you fund are the right digs.

Case Study · Results — Stress Test

What if reality doesn't follow our physics?
We rigged the test against Earthflow — it still wins by 60–80%.

If the arena secretly favored our math, these three tests would expose it. Each one plants a failure process built outside Earthflow's model family — same six seeds, identical protocol.

Different aging math

Failures planted with a different aging law than the one Earthflow assumes.

9.0×+68% vs incumbent
Hidden luck

Every segment carries an invisible random frailty no model can see or compute.

8.7×+78% vs incumbent
Half the signal erased

Half the failure drivers made invisible to every model — Earthflow included.

4.4× vs 2.8×+60% vs incumbent

Three failure processes deliberately built outside our model family — Earthflow leads every one.
The win is physics and outcomes, not a home-field artifact.

Case Study · Results — Degraded Data

Then we broke the data.
Earthflow kept working.

Real utility data is imperfect — so we handicapped the inputs, one failure mode at a time, and re-ran the whole test. Earthflow is resilient in the face of bad data.

% of failures captured in top-10% shortlist — under data handicaps
Full data (reference)
76%
Only 3 years of outage history
75.8%
40% of install years unknown
74.7%
No loading data at all (no SCADA)
57.1%
Outage log at feeder grain only
55.2%
incumbent · full data · 32%

Even at its most degraded — no loading data, outages not even tied to segments —
Earthflow still beats the incumbent running on perfect data.

Case Study · The Ceiling

Could anyone get to 100%, a perfect prediction?
No — but +10% is still on the table.

Why 100% is impossible

Statistics guarantees a long tail: a fleet has thousands of genuinely low-risk segments, each carrying a small probability — and with that many of them, some inevitably fail. Those failures belong to segments whose true risk really was low; no better model, no more data, no added sensor could have put them on the list.

We measured the limit directly: ranking by the arena's true hazard itself — perfect knowledge — captures the same share Earthflow does. Earthflow already sits at the information ceiling. The gap to 100% is luck, not model error.

Where the next +10% comes from
PD & tan δ test results — accessory & insulation condition, fed into the dielectric module
AMI last-gasp events — momentaries that never reach the OMS
Distributed temperature sensing — on critical circuits, measured θ replaces computed
Neutral-current monitoring — unlocks the AC-corrosion refinement
Vault moisture sensing — the wet-duty coincidence, measured

We tell you where the ceiling is — and exactly which sensor buys the next point.
Targeted sensing where the model says it pays, never blanket instrumentation.

The Deliverable · What You Receive

Every cable segment outputs 50+ fields — and counting, every month.
Your parameters, your formats, your terms.

SURFACE SUBSTATION ONE SEGMENT MV UNDERGROUND RUN
The segment record — what every segment carries illustrative
Identity & registry · 7IDs · geometry · voltage · construction · install year · splices · prior faults
Condition & risk · 7PoF + band · RUL · Health Index · percentile · action — full driver split:
thermal 41 · corrosion 24 · lightning 18 · flood 10 · wet duty 7 (%)
Capacity & ratings · 6Dual-basis ampacity · cyclic · emergency · headroom · exceedance · year-to-constraint
utilization 34 · headroom to rating 66 (%)
Environmental · 7Soil thermal · soil temp · θ(t) stats · corrosion · flood · surge · wet duty
Raw series · 3Hourly I(t) — ~8,760 pts/yr · environmental series · allocation basis
Future & electrification · 4EV scenarios · heat-pump peaks · post-scenario headroom · growth
Community context · 4Customers · homes & buildings served · critical loads · block-group context · equity weighting
Consequence & rollups · 2Feeder / substation aggregates · criticality-weighted risk
Provenance & uncertainty · 4Status per input · band per output · unscorable flag · fitted coefficients
Monthly Outputs CSVParquetGeoJSONJSON over APIrendered PDF / HTML

Adding or removing fields is configuration, not development.
Updated monthly — outages and load history accrue by the month, the environment moves by the season, and cable aging is slow physics; a faster refresh would re-rank on noise, not signal.

Straight Answers

What we are — and what we are not.

7
The entire learned surface: seven parameters, tuned to your own outage history — informed by loading and the asset registry.
Everything else is the Earthflow Underground Physics Engine.
We are not
  • Not pre-trained on anyone's data — no utility data, no public datasets, no cross-utility bleed.
  • Not training on your data — tuning seven parameters is not learning a model from your records.
  • Not an LLM — no foundation model anywhere in the engine.
  • Not sending your data anywhere — nothing leaves for a third party or another AI at inference.
  • Not a fine-tune of someone else's model — nothing borrowed, nothing wrapped.
  • Not a SaaS — we deliver answers, not another login.
We are
  • A Physics AI engine — constrained by governing equations, never free-fitted.
  • First-principles physics — thermal, electrical, chemical, mechanical, hydrological — with cited constants; the statistical layer is the only fitted layer.
  • Tuned per utility — seven parameters fitted to your outages; zero cross-utility anything.
  • Built for imperfect data — degraded inputs widen the uncertainty band, never produce silent guesses.
  • A data product — CSV · Parquet · GeoJSON · JSON API · rendered PDF/HTML — monthly, resolved per segment.
  • Our own architecture — every module purpose-built, our custom code end to end.
Load Simulator Load Simulator — EV electrification what-if with model inputs and constrained-segment counts
Environmental Record Per-segment environmental record — soil, terrain, erosion and flood fields with provenance chips
Scope · What We Can Model Today

Built for the underground network utilities actually run.

Live in Earthflow today
Upcoming roadmap · in development
Voltage class
1–35 kV MV distribution — 12.47 kV systems, 15 & 25 kV insulation classes
Up to 69 kV (optimizations); >35 kV subtransmission excluded by design
Grid topology
Radial & open-loop URD — one-way power flow, urban and rural, no per-mode tuning
Meshed downtown secondary networks (correlated-failure modeling)
Install & construction
Direct-buried & duct/conduit · riser transitions · 1Ø laterals & 3Ø mains · Cu/Al
Burial depth defaulted (labeled) where unrecorded
Cable & accessories
XLPE · TR-XLPE · EPR · PILC · HMWPE · joints, splices & terminations as the failure target
Direct splice covariate activates with work-order data
Perils modeled
Thermal · corrosion · flood · lightning-surge · chronic wet-duty · ground-movement — per segment
Diagnostic-test evidence (tan δ, PD) activates with test records
Utility data intake
GIS · OMS · SCADA · AMI · work orders* — any schema (field-mapped), coded and free-text causes, OMS↔GIS ID crosswalk
No common data model required · no new sensors
Imperfect data
Degrades gracefully — missing inputs widen the band; still leads at 40% install-years unknown / no SCADA
Onboarding scores each network 0–14; scopes below 8 are declined
Reach & scale
Any US territory · global environmental layer · full-fleet scale — 82,887 segments · 3,469 circuit-miles · 177 substations across 3 regions demonstrated
International outage/GIS onboarding per utility

* Work-order data is optional — it sharpens joint / splice localization and fault attribution, and activates the direct-splice covariate.

The Earthflow Underground model continues to refine and grow in complexity month over month — in progress.

What You Receive

The same four questions — now answered on every feeder segment.

1
Condition

Vintage, your outage history, thermal duty, soil corrosivity and flood exposure — with remaining useful life.

12 34 5 healthy end of life
Health Index 1–5 · what you replace
2
Capacity bottlenecks

A thermal rating from soil properties and burial method, against your measured loading.

measured load headroom thermal rating
Capacity Index, % headroom · what you connect
3
Where to test next

The worst-segment list your partial-discharge and tan δ crews work from.

Ranked segment table with per-segment action: replace, defer or maintain, each with a confidence figure
Ranked test queue
4
Where to underground

Corridors ranked by risk reduction per mile of spend.

Capital planning output: optimal annual capex against reactive cost, outage minutes avoided, customers protected
Ranked corridor list

Produced by the Earthflow underground physics module family. Every score carries a value, a confidence interval and its provenance — each input tagged measured or imputed, so a number can be defended rather than just quoted.

Up to 10 years of deferred capital, and up to 10% off underground O&M (modelled)

The Twin, Running

A living twin — all live in this demo.
📍 Greensboro NC  ·  📍 Austin TX  ·  📍 San Francisco CA

Every segment scored, every score auditable. Live product capture on modeled networks — click any segment for its index, its confidence band, and the inputs behind it, measured or imputed.

Open the live explorer →
Let's Get Started

Start with four extracts.
We do the rest.

Utility data
  • The four extracts · registry, outages, loading, meter intervals
  • Read-only, one-way, no operational-technology link
Earthflow Environmental Intelligence Layer
  • Soil · chemistry & corrosivity
  • Water · flood & groundwater
  • Moisture, terrain · surge exposure
  • 100% national coverage, resolved to the segment
Earthflow Physics AI — live in week one, your network digital twin in under 14 days
Eight of the eleven underground physics modules run in your first week · injected equations you can audit, never black-box
Health Index 1–5 · remaining useful life Capacity Index · % headroom to new load
Keep every asset · no rip-and-replace Messy data welcome · we map it Read-only, one-way · never touches operations Delivered your way · API or export · monthly

Benchmarked blind against every publicly implementable alternative — 76% of failures captured, 9 of the top 10 named in advance.

earthflow.orbyfy.com/earthflow-underground  ·  earthflow.orbyfy.com/underground-epri (slide deck)  ·  Orbyfy, Inc.

★ Edison Awards 2026 Gold EPRI AI for Power Finalist Black & Veatch IgniteX Siemens Next47 Start-up School NVIDIA Inception Boston Business Journal IDC Leader · Utility Solutions Techstars EnergyTech · Alabama Power Greentown Labs
Click or press → to advance