Back to Engram

Engram / Guide 3 of 3 / 3 min read

Beneath the bonnet: memory and decisions

Separate semantic retrieval, temporal facts and domain evaluation.

The reason

Finding a document is only the start of a decision.

Useful knowledge includes where a fact came from, when it was true and what it relates to. A search result alone does not preserve that context.

Engram combines retrieval with relationships and temporal records. Domain workflows can use that knowledge to prepare proposals for human review. The general Decision Engine is still in development.

48Nauts / Product guides · Architecture, domain pilot & development

How the knowledge system fits together

Sources

Documents, conversations and connected systems

Content and its source context enter through configured integrations.

Ingestion and knowledge extraction

Prepare searchable text, embeddings, metadata, entities and relationships.

↓ Different representations of the knowledge
Semantic search

Vector index

Qdrant / embeddings
Find related content by meaning.

Structured records

PostgreSQL

Source metadata, projects and timestamps. Keyword search.

Relationships over time

Neo4j + Graphiti

Entities, connected facts and their temporal context.

↓ Combine relevant matches, records and relationships

Hybrid retrieval and orchestration

Interpret the question, search the relevant stores, combine and rank results, then assemble context for the response.

↕ Questions and retrieved context through the API

Applications, agents and the dashboard

Use retrieved knowledge with its supporting sources.

Domain workflow · supply-chain pilot

Evidence → specialist assessments → decision case → human review

Domain rules and calculations support the assessment. The general Decision Engine and reusable outcome feedback remain in development.

Logical overview of the documented Engram architecture, not a deployment inventory. The separate Engram-OSS memory design is not shown here.

Engram needs more than a list of similar documents to answer questions about an organisation. Its documented architecture combines a vector index for semantic matches, a relational database for structured records and a graph for relationships over time. These representations answer different parts of a question.

The architecture names Qdrant for vector search, PostgreSQL for records and keyword search, and Neo4j with Graphiti for temporal knowledge. Ingestion prepares the content and extracts the information those stores need. The retrieval layer searches the relevant stores and combines their results into context that an application or agent can use.

For example, a question about a delayed shipment may need the original update, the affected supplier and the orders connected to it. Similar wording helps find the update. Structured records identify the shipment, while relationships connect it to the wider business impact. The answer depends on those connections having been captured correctly.

Retrieval is a starting point

Embeddings provide a way to retrieve semantically related content. They are useful for locating material even when a question uses different wording from the source.

Engram’s documented architecture also preserves facts and relationships. Applications can use this structured context alongside retrieved text instead of treating a single search result as a complete account.

Two questions about time

When was a fact valid, and when did the system learn it? These are different questions. A late-arriving correction may change your understanding of an earlier event.

The temporal knowledge architecture distinguishes those times and preserves superseded statements. This is documented design; the precise available behaviour needs to be demonstrated in the domain implementation.

The decision process

Hard constraints and calculations should remain explicit. A focused model judgment can assess a bounded question while code controls what happens with its result.

The supply-chain pilot has a decision ledger and council process. Specialist assessments contribute to a decision case for human review. This is a domain workflow that uses the knowledge, rather than another kind of database.

The general Decision Engine and reusable outcome feedback remain in development. The diagram separates that work from the knowledge and retrieval architecture; it does not present a complete autonomous decision system as available today.

Architecture and deployment are different questions

The diagram explains component responsibilities. It is not a claim that every Engram installation runs the same services or has every connector enabled. The vault also describes an Engram-OSS memory design with session context, persistent memory and graph recall. Those layers should not be treated as an identical deployment of the organisational knowledge system shown here.

For a particular deployment, check which sources are connected, how access is restricted and whether retrieval preserves the source and time context you need. Extracted relationships and summaries can be wrong. Keeping the underlying evidence available gives the reviewer a way to challenge them.