Public sector & funding
We address security and law-enforcement authorities, federal and state ministries, and public research bodies with an interest in early-warning research in public spaces — under an explicitly fundamental-rights-compliant architecture.
Status note
This page addresses research, funding, and cooperation inquiries. The research is currently self-funded without external third-party funding; any third-party funding or consortium contributions acquired are disclosed publicly upon acceptance. Maturity is at the research-and-validation stage; a pilot together with user authorities is the intended next step. Operational deployment of security software is not the subject of this page.
Capacity to deliver
Before any funding or consortium decision comes the question of delivery capacity. This research is run by an independent, self-funded lab — and can point to a solid track record already in production.
The same cognitive architecture we publish runs in production systems: ZenAI as a self-hosted knowledge-work platform and ZenBrain as an open-source core on npm. 11,589 automated tests and an open-access preprint with replication material show that the research becomes working, tested software.
The research is run throughout self-funded without external grants — carried by a registered sole proprietorship (DUNS 317163443). This independence allows a dependable own contribution within consortia; any third-party funding or consortium contributions acquired are disclosed publicly upon acceptance.
The intended path runs from the research prototype (CrowdGuard) through a joint pilot with user authorities and external validation (notified-body pre-assessment, legal opinions) to transfer. The fundamental-rights-preserving civil-liberties architecture is the differentiator here — scientifically and in regulatory terms — and a source of European added value: security research that is deployable under EU law at all.
Into a consortium the lab brings methodological rigour, a working prototype, production engineering, and persistent identifiers with pre-registration. Its natural role is the research-and-technology component — alongside user authorities as end users and a university or institute in the host role.
The evidence in detail: The principal investigator's background · Technology in production
What we offer
Joint research projects on concrete methodological questions: selection and annotation methodology, three-outlier validation, construct validity, inter-rater reliability (target: Cohen's κ ≥ 0.61).
Participation in consortium proposals for BMBF SIFO, Horizon Europe Cluster 3 (Civil Security for Society) and national funding lines. Public authorities are welcome as end-user components.
Structured data requests processable under research clauses (GDPR Art. 89 in conjunction with § 27 BDSG, plus sector-specific statutes where applicable) — with a prior MoU and a documented Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA).
Pre-assessment under AI Act Annex III (law enforcement). Outreach to TÜV SÜD, TÜV Rheinland and Bureau Veritas is in preparation; the architecture is designed for conformity (see Research Ethics). The deployer-side obligations — a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (Art. 27 AI Act) and registration in the EU database (Art. 49 AI Act) — are anticipated in the architecture.
Advisory on crowd-dynamics analysis, three-outlier model, civil-liberties architecture, demarcation from SPOT and the Berlin three-stage model, and reference-case methodology.
Contributions in trade publications of the public sector (e.g. Behörden Spiegel) to communicate methodological content to practitioners.
What we do not do
Authorities cooperating with us can rely on the following properties:
Funding and consortium paths
Enquiries about third-party funding participation, consortium proposals, and commissioned research are actively considered. The pathways outlined below are the most natural entry points for collaboration.
Consortium build-up for the research line Safety in public spaces, with the application submitted via the project-management agency VDI Technologiezentrum (VDI TZ). Authority partners are structurally foreseen as end-user component; entry points exist via established innovation networks such as Fraunhofer SIRIOS and InnoBOSK. Outreach to research institutions in waves 2026/27.
Participation in European consortia in Disaster-Resilient Society, Protection of Critical Infrastructure, and Fighting Crime and Terrorism. Civil-liberties architecture as a methodological differentiator.
Application-oriented research and development funding — in particular ZIM for SME research, BMI and BBK lines on civil protection and internal security.
Programmes open directly to an independent research lab even without a university host — EIC (European Innovation Council), SPRIND (German Federal Agency for Disruptive Innovation), and the Cyberagentur (Agency for Innovation in Cybersecurity). These complement the consortium pathways in which a university or non-university institute takes on the host role.
Interdisciplinary security and fundamental-rights research via Carl Zeiss Foundation, Volkswagen Foundation, and federal state innovation programmes.
Enquiries about further funding or cooperation formats — for instance institutional research partnerships or directly funded commissioned research — are explicitly welcome.
Inquiry process
The following sequence has proven efficient and reliable for both sides — from initial contact to a joint pilot:
Brief outline of the authority's question, the proposed scope of collaboration, and (if applicable) funding path. Designation of contact persons.
Confidential pre-briefing on research scope, civil-liberties architecture, and the methodological approach foreseen. This is also where the scope of a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) is set. NDA where needed.
Written agreement on research goal, data access, role distribution, research-clause basis, publication rights, and endpoints. In parallel, the DPIA under Art. 35 GDPR and — where an authority is the user — the notified-body pre-assessment under AI Act Annex III are initiated.
Joint funding proposal, consortium agreement, or — for smaller scope — direct research engagement.
A pilot with the user authority within the agreed scope — bound to fundamental rights, with a human in the loop and documented endpoints. Operational deployment of security software remains reserved for a later, separately agreed phase.
Methodological standards
The first question before any cooperation concerns methodological robustness. The operational standards of our work are documented on a dedicated page: pre-registration of central documents via OpenTimestamps, replication material as a default part of every publication, external validation through peer review, notified-body pre-assessments and legal opinions, documented ablation studies, and data minimisation as a methodological decision. Funding bodies and research institutions will also find there the open methodological questions we name ourselves.
Legal and ethical framework
Prior to any operational phase, the documented framework applies: GDPR Art. 89 in conjunction with § 27 BDSG, AI Act (demarcation from Art. 5(1)(d), design for high-risk requirements under Annex III), freedom of assembly (BVerfGE 69, 315), and data minimisation. A Data Protection Impact Assessment under Art. 35 GDPR is conducted.
Contact for the public sector
For research and consortium inquiries from authorities, ministries, and public research bodies, please get in touch at the address below. Initial inquiries are typically answered within ten working days.
Send public-sector inquiry →More from this research
Core and application fields, on a shared ethics foundation.