Ingest
Start with P6/MSP schedules and the registers that matter. Value does not wait for a multiyear systems-integration program.
How Cybereum works
From fragmented state to governed execution intelligence.
Cybereum does not add another dashboard to the project stack. It connects schedule, cost, risk, resource, contract and field evidence into a living project model, computes how change propagates through that model, and turns the result into traceable decisions and accountable action.
Canonical project state · system viewProvenance → state → CPM 2.0 + EVM 2.0 → reasoning → governed action
Fragmented stateExisting systems remain authoritative in their domains; Cybereum resolves their relationships instead of replacing them.
Connected computationThe graph makes path structure, uncertainty and propagation computable against the same versioned state.
Governed executionRecommendations become owned decisions and traceable action, then the next observed state closes the loop.
CYB / ZK-UPETrust substrate
Everything above rests on identity and provenance that survive the project.
Persistent participant identity, provenance for what was known and when, and selective disclosure across organizations that do not share systems. This is the foundation the project model is built on, not a separate product surface — the cryptography stays infrastructure, and the people using Cybereum see governed state, not a ledger.
- Persistent identity across companies and phases
- Provenance binding evidence to the decision it supported
- Selective disclosure so parties share verified state without surrendering their systems
01 · Temporal knowledge graph
One model the whole project can reason over.
Schedules, cost, risk, resources, contracts, readiness evidence and decisions are not independent records. Cybereum resolves them into time-valid, connected state while preserving source ownership and lineage.
Reconcile
Normalize activities, milestones, interfaces, risks and entities into one versioned state with explicit relationships.
Compute
Run path, graph, probabilistic and propagation analysis against the same project model.
Trace
Every material assertion retains source, time, derivation and the project-state version that produced it.
02 · CPM 2.0 · Schedule & path intelligence
The finish date is a network outcome, not a red bar.
Cybereum examines schedule quality, path families, float erosion, interfaces and convergence points so teams can see which corridors are genuinely capable of governing completion and where intervention has leverage.
Critical + near-critical corridors
Track the family of plausible completion-driving paths instead of treating the current critical path as permanent truth.
Path intelligenceInterface propagation
Expose where contractor, supplier, engineering and commissioning dependencies transmit delay into milestones that matter.
Network structureSchedule quality before prediction
Reasoning is only as defensible as the planning logic underneath it. Structural diagnostics come before probabilistic confidence.
ScheduleIQIntervention leverage
Find the activity or interface through which multiple exposed paths converge — where a corrective action can buy disproportionate time.
Schwerpunkt03 · EVM 2.0 · Predictive performance control
Move from a date to a distribution — and from lagging status to forward exposure.
Probabilistic forecasting, network analytics and reference-pattern reasoning quantify how uncertainty moves through the delivery system. The purpose is not a prettier forecast; it is earlier recognition of the decisions that can still change the outcome.
Milestone confidence
Represent completion as a range with explicit uncertainty rather than one deterministic promise.
Path criticality
Estimate how often a path or activity governs the finish across simulated futures.
Propagation
Carry schedule, risk and interface effects through actual dependency structure rather than isolated scorecards.
Pattern foresight
Use prior project patterns where appropriate without allowing historical correlation to override current project structure.
04 · Dyēŭs · Reasoning core
Computation becomes an answer someone can defend.
CPM 2.0 and EVM 2.0 produce structure and forecast. Dyēŭs reasons over that computed state — never over documents alone — and keeps the state, method, assumptions and evidence attached to every recommendation it puts forward.
05 · Governed action
Intelligence is incomplete until someone owns the decision.
Cybereum distinguishes analytical output, candidate action, human decision and governed execution. Recommendations do not silently mutate consequential project state; named authority approves, amends or refuses, and the resulting action remains connected to evidence and outcome.
Stateversioned project facts
Analysispaths, forecasts, propagation
Candidate actionranked intervention + expected effect
Human authorityapprove · amend · refuse
Outcomenew state measured against forecast
First engagement
Open the system with one schedule.
Start with one representative P6 or Microsoft Project schedule and one high-value delivery question. Prove the intelligence before expanding the operating layer.