We started KorrAI to monitor ground deformation on critical infrastructure using satellite data. Millimeter-scale precision on where the earth moves. But after working with operators and engineers, we hit the real constraint: synthesis.
A closure engineer inherits decades of scattered data. Satellite imagery, water monitoring, geology reports, soil surveys, historical records, regulatory filings. They spend weeks manually reconstructing site history before they can assess remediation options. Regulators re-ask the same questions because there's no traceable record of what was checked and why.
The bottleneck isn't data availability. It's operationalizing all of it: building a workspace where closure teams can ingest multi-modal sources, surface what matters, and produce reports that cite everything. We call it TRAIL.
Billion-dollar infrastructure decisions rest on scattered evidence. Mining closure, construction risk, data center siting are high-stakes, high-evidence environments. Being wrong costs regulatory delays, remediation overruns, or worse.
AI won't replace closure engineers or regulators. But AI can do what humans shouldn't: hunt through thousands of satellite images, cross-reference water monitoring across decades, surface anomalies, connect disparate data sources. The closure engineer uses that synthesis to make the actual decision: the one that moves.
The winners in AI-for-infrastructure aren't companies that replace expertise. They're companies that operationalize evidence synthesis so experts can spend their time on judgment, not paperwork.
We're running closure and remediation assessments across tier-1 mine operations in Canada. We're working with regulatory and federal-care closure teams on legacy sites. Our customers are in active discussions for multi-site rollouts across their operating portfolios.
We're expanding that footprint and we need Technical Advisors to shape the product as we scale.
We want a technical advisor who:
- Has spent significant time in site closure in one core area (geology, hydrology, operations, regulatory, geotechnical) and a genuine passion for how technology can solve closure problems
- Understands the data landscape: what exists, what's missing, what's hard to access
- Knows how decisions get made and what evidence moves them
- Can tell us when we're solving the right problem and when we're solving theater
This isn't a consulting retainer. We want advisors embedded enough to influence product direction, but independent enough to be credible to the market.
- Advise on closure-specific playbooks and workflows (what data matters, how it gets used, what gets signed off on)
- Review product decisions and early deployments; flag what doesn't match the real problem
- Connect us to the closure community: operators, regulators, engineers who need this
- Lend credibility and judgment as we expand operationally
- Cadence: weekly advisor calls + async feedback on key product decisions. Not a full-time commitment.
- You're advising us because you've seen closure problems firsthand and you want to shape how AI gets embedded into the solution not because you're a tech expert.
- Term: 12-month initial term, renewable
- Logistics: Distributed team (Halifax, Toronto, remote). You stay wherever you are. Calls scheduled around your timezone.
We want to understand your perspective on the problem. If you're interested, send a short response (a paragraph or two) to these questions:
- What's the biggest bottleneck you've seen in how closure assessments actually get made? Think about the data, the decisions, the timeline, the back-and-forth with regulators. What slows things down most?
- If you could offload one part of closure assessment to an AI agent, something that currently eats weeks or months, what would it be? And what would that actually solve for you operationally?
We're not looking for polished responses. We're looking for people who've thought about this problem deeply.
Closure is operationally broken. Sites sit unremediated for years. Decisions get delayed because evidence is scattered. Regulators can't verify what was checked. We're building the tool that fixes this.
If you've spent the last decade in closure work and you see a tool that could actually shift how sites get assessed, and you want a seat at the table while we build it, reach out.