Ask in operational language
Questions could take forms such as “Show me purchase orders from last month,” “List everything we bought from Acme,” or “What did we order from vendor 2241?”
Result · resilient aviation operations
An aviation software vendor wanted people to ask operational questions in everyday language. The work created a governed route from those questions to approved ERP functions while keeping the reported execution local.

Business consequence
The original case describes a multi-terabyte Oracle database with more than 900 tables and thousands of columns. Names such as MT05_TRK_LNK, ORD_HDR_FLG_X, and INV_RSRC_IDX made the structure difficult to interpret without specialized knowledge.
Teams needed a practical way to retrieve information about inventory, maintenance records, and part tracking without exposing an unrestricted database surface or sending sensitive industrial data to public cloud models.
Source-attributed case facts
The figures and operating details on this page are reported in the original Intelligence Factory case. Customer identity, production deployment status, user volume, response time, accuracy, and quantified savings are not published.
Operating explanation

Training manuals and developer notes were ingested and aligned with the live schema. That created a crosswalk from cryptic table and column names to concepts such as purchase order, line item, and vendor.
Incoming questions were then classified against curated, parameterized functions rather than converted into arbitrary SQL at runtime.
Questions could take forms such as “Show me purchase orders from last month,” “List everything we bought from Acme,” or “What did we order from vendor 2241?”
The ontology mapped those variations to a function class—for example, GetPurchaseOrdersByVendorAndDateRange—and extracted concrete parameters.
The function defined how to call approved SQL, a stored procedure, or an internal REST API instead of opening unrestricted query generation.
The reported starting set of 10–15 function classes came from customer interviews, log mining, and informed judgment, then expanded iteratively.

Technical reason to believe
SemDB generated first-pass mappings from the vendor’s documentation. Those mappings were aligned with the database schema and expressed as an ontology in ProtoScript, implemented through Buffaly.
The resulting abstraction separated business meaning from raw schema names. For operational-data questions, the local parser mapped entities and intents to known function classes; broader advisory questions stayed outside that database workflow.

The diagram places these processing steps inside a dashed boundary labeled Safe, Self-Contained Process.
This design reduced reliance on serializing an enormous schema into a model context and limited runtime requests to an intentionally exposed database surface.
The original case reports that operational data stayed local and that no general-purpose external model call was required for this query path. Independent security, regulatory, injection-resistance, accuracy, and performance validation are outside the published record.
Talk to Us
Start with the questions people need answered, the systems holding the data, and the boundaries the query path must respect.
Talk to Us