# Desk log ADR-SAT-20260825

**Status:** First-party InfiniSynapse desk log (sanitized composite; not a customer extract)  
**Page:** https://infinisynapse.com/en/blog/self-service-analytics-tools  
**Run ID:** `ADR-SAT-20260825`  
**Date:** 2026-08-25 (Tuesday)  
**Operator:** InfiniSynapse Data Team  
**Attestor:** William Zhu, InfiniSynapse cofounder ([GitHub @allwefantasy](https://github.com/allwefantasy))  
**Contact for contradictions:** zhuhl@infinisynapse.com

## What this file is

A downloadable record of two passes on one Friday activation memo. The first pass pasted a chart into Slack. The second restated the goal, opened the filter, and opened the file. It is **not** a named-logo customer case, a vendor bake-off, or a Wikipedia / Gartner / Stanford / McKinsey / NIST / OWASP experiment.

## Four-step method (reproducible)

1. Bind an activation grain on a sanitized Monday events export plus a one-page note (first key action in 7 days, internal accounts excluded). Sanitize first.
2. Accept the Slack-screenshot pass as the control. Score three checks: goal restated, filter opened, file opened.
3. Walk the same goal as a reviewer-open memo: decision → filter → two week tables → file. Score the same three checks.
4. Keep both artifacts side by side. Stop if two of the three checks fail.

## Source and goal

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Sources | Sanitized Monday events export, 4,820 new users last week and 5,010 this week, plus a one-page note that locked “activated” as first key action in 7 days (internal accounts excluded) |
| Standing question | Did activation drop after last Tuesday’s release for the same new-user cohort we used last week |
| Contrast | Slack screenshot vs reviewer-open memo |

## Results

| Retrieval state | Goal restated | Filter opened | File opened |
|---|---|---|---|
| Slack screenshot | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Reviewer-open memo | 1 | 1 | 1 |

Activation on this run: 21.1% last week (1,017 of 4,820) vs 18.4% this week (922 of 5,010). One event alias contributed most of the gap. The PM confirmed a rename, not a real drop, and did not delay the next experiment.

Wall-clock for the successful pass: about 6 minutes (warehouse time excluded). The clock started when the operator wrote the standing activation question and ended when the restated grain, the filter list, and the file sat in one folder.

## What you may cite

- Artifact counts 0/0/0 → 1/1/1, 21.1% vs 18.4% activation, 1,017 / 4,820 vs 922 / 5,010, ~6 min wall-clock, run ID

## What you may not claim

- Customer uplift %, official EEAT score, named-logo case, or that Wikipedia / Gartner / Stanford / McKinsey / NIST / OWASP / CDC / PubMed / HL7 / SNOMED / OGC / WAIC scored this run

## Independent context (not this run)

- [CDC NCHS](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/)
- [PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/)
- [HL7 FHIR](https://www.hl7.org/fhir/)
- [SNOMED](https://www.snomed.org/)
- [OGC CRS](https://www.opengis.net/def/crs/)
- [Stanford HAI AI Index](https://hai.stanford.edu/ai-index)
- [McKinsey State of AI](https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/quantumblack/our-insights/the-state-of-ai)
- [Gartner Peer Insights — Analytics and BI Platforms](https://www.gartner.com/reviews/market/analytics-business-intelligence-platforms)
- [NIST AI Risk Management Framework](https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework)
- [OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications](https://owasp.org/www-project-top-10-for-large-language-model-applications/)
- [W3C DCAT](https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat-3/)
- [DataCite](https://datacite.org/)
- First-party homepage recognition only: [2026 WAIC Future Tech OPC Excellence Award](https://infinisynapse.com/#recognition) (self-described company messaging; not independently verified in this log; not a review of the article)