PRODUCT 01 · INDEPENDENT SECOND OPINION

An independent technical view for investors and capital partners.

Doku reviews the lender's existing engineering diligence, independently challenges the technical assumptions most material to repayment, reproduces selected tests where necessary, and issues a separate lender-aligned opinion.

Start Independent Second Opinion Request NDA and conflict check

Download product brief

Reliance, permitted-user, distribution, liability, and confidentiality language remains subject to executed terms and counsel approval.

The governing product question

Can the cluster and platform deliver the performance, availability, workload support, and billable capacity assumed by the financing, and is the existing technical diligence sufficient to support that conclusion?

Evidence to opinion

A bounded, source-linked technical workstream.

Required inputs

Existing lender or originator technical-diligence package
Borrower and operator materials
Cluster architecture and equipment configuration
Relevant workload, customer, availability, and SLA assumptions
Existing benchmarks, telemetry, acceptance results, and operating evidence
Financing decision context and material assumptions
Data-room access or a secure evidence package
Names of relevant organizations for conflict review

What Doku does

Identify the five to ten technical claims most material to repayment
Review the existing engineering analysis and supporting evidence
Challenge assumptions, omissions, confidence levels, and contradictions
Independently reproduce selected tests when necessary and feasible
Assess the path from installed capacity to dependable billable capacity
Map technical gaps to conditions, holdbacks, covenants, reporting requirements, or remediation triggers
Issue a named-principal technical opinion
Present the conclusions to credit committee, investors, or capital partners

Exact deliverables

Outputs built for the funding decision.

Independent Technical Opinion

Approximately 10–15 pages, concluding that the financed technical case is supportable, supportable subject to conditions, insufficiently evidenced, or not supportable on current evidence.

Assumption-Challenge and Claim-Evidence Register

Machine-readable CSV and JSON plus a lender-readable table.

Selected Acceptance-Test Review

Methods, thresholds, observed results, evidence references, confidence, and exceptions.

Funding Conditions and Closure Schedule

Conditions precedent, draw conditions, holdbacks, covenants, reporting requirements, remediation, and required closure evidence.

Credit-Committee or Investor Readout

A 45–60-minute presentation and question session.

Product-specific samples

Inspect the actual artifact set.

All sample content is illustrative, independently Doku-branded, and contains no customer or development data.

Product sample PDF Product brief Intake checklist CSV Example JSON Example CSV

Normalized technical states

Clear language, bounded conclusions.

SupportableSupportable subject to conditionsInsufficient evidenceNot supportable on current evidenceClosure pendingVerified closed

These are technical states. They are never presented as credit-approval states.

Operating model

Embedded workflow. Independent opinion.

Party	Responsibility
Silicore or lending partner	Origination, borrower relationship, financing structure, and final credit decision
Doku Assurance	Independent technical scope, evidence review, selected testing, technical opinion, and credit translation
Borrower or operator	Evidence access, technical interviews, testing access, remediation, and closure documentation
Capital partner or credit committee	Independent review of conclusions and final funding judgment

Design-partner pilot

Start with a live or sanitized historical transaction.

A historical, declined, closed, or currently underwriting transaction can be used for the first review. Doku focuses on the five to ten claims most material to repayment and delivers the same opinion, evidence register, and condition schedule used for a live engagement.

NDA available. A lender-approved data room or sanitized evidence package is sufficient for initial scoping.

Scope a design-partner review

Not included unless separately scoped

Explicit limits protect the opinion.

Legal review
Valuation
Accounting or tax diligence
Environmental or physical-facility engineering beyond material dependencies
Continuous real-time monitoring
Penetration testing
Formal audit or certification
Credit approval
Borrower or vendor representation

Partner integration

Use the portal or API. Keep the opinion independently Doku-branded.

Initiate through the portal or partner API, follow normalized status updates, receive signed Doku deliverables, and return technical conditions to the partner's credit workflow.

Review integration options

Product FAQ

Scope before certainty.

Does Doku replace the lender's engineering team?

No. Doku provides a separate, lender-aligned technical opinion and can complement an existing internal or third-party review.

Can the first review use a historical transaction?

Yes. A live, sanitized historical, closed, declined, or currently underwriting transaction can be used, subject to conflict and feasibility review.

Is the indicative fee binding?

No. Final scope, timing, and fee are confirmed after conflict review, intake, and evidence-access assessment.

Next step

Start with a conflict check and decision-bounded intake.

Indicative only. Final scope and fee are confirmed after conflict review and complete intake. Timelines begin after complete intake and access to required evidence.

Doku provides a technical opinion, not a credit approval, lender waiver, legal opinion, audit, engineering certification, insurance determination, or substitute for lender judgment.

Travel, third-party test infrastructure, specialist laboratories, and unusual on-site requirements are separately scoped where applicable.

Start Independent Second Opinion Open Independent Second Opinion sample