Alex Rajcoomar portfolio

Selected work

The strongest pieces, put through one shape.

The 7 pieces recorded as featured, 52,815 words, 40 figures and 58 tables between them, each put through one shape: question, context, approach, evidence, build, finding, limitation, artifact. A slot is filled only by something already on the site, and 8 of 56 are not filled at all. The whole corpus is on Work.

Primary review / 03 capabilities

Three capabilities, one file each.

The three files this page leads with, one to a capability. Each card opens at the section that carries the working model rather than at the front of the document. Every count on a card is measured on this build; which three lead is a reading, declared in content/review.json and open to disagreement.

01 // Systems fragilityPrimary

Systems / network craft

The Brittle Network

A pre-registered protocol on the Late Bronze Age collapse

A research protocol: methodology only, no results

9,237Words
4Figures
16Tables

Synthetic network demonstration. The protocol declares its hypotheses and falsification conditions before any data is touched, and claims no historical results.

Inspect the network model

02 // Institutional valuationPrimary

Financial architecture

The Trillion-Dollar Vintage

A study edition of the AI capital-cycle adjudication

Two rival anchors carried to the end, never averaged

18,610Words
16Figures
15Tables

Study edition. The fork between the two anchors is never closed, any mark arithmetic produced rather than an instrument measured is drawn open, and the page corrects its own arithmetic in public.

Compare the two anchors

03 // Probabilistic forecastingPrimary

Forecast audit / calibration

Predictive History

The map, and the method that audits it

Fifteen systems and 148 couplings, under an instrument that failed its own test

9,621Words
11Figures
14Tables

The audit instrument was run against its own falsification test and failed it. The finding is published in its narrow form rather than its strong one.

Open the audit map

Supporting dossiers / 04 files

The rest of the record, one move away.

Four further files under the same measurement, kept off the first screen rather than out of the record. The complete case reading for all seven is below.

04 Forensic screening

Flagged in Hindsight

Five Canadian frauds, put back through the forensic screen ex ante

Five Canadian frauds with completed findings, retested ex ante

5,008 words 4 figures 6 tables

Open the dossier

05 Adversarial research

Crucible Cockpit

Adversarial claim auditing: decompose, attack, grade what survives

Three recorded runs, each with its graveyard and its unabridged transcript

612 words 0 figures 2 tables

Open the dossier

06 Technical accounting

IFRS 15 Judgment Trainer

Sixty-two revenue scenarios, every answer anchored to the Handbook

Sixty-two revenue scenarios, every answer anchored to the Handbook

3,946 words 0 figures 1 tables

Open the dossier

07 Tax and valuation

The tax base nobody discloses

A Dollarama valuation built on capital cost allowance

A tax base reconstructed from the filings, then tested forward

5,781 words 5 figures 4 tables

Open the dossier

Audit index / all 07 files
Question, Context, Approach, Evidence, Build, Finding, Limitation, Artifact
Open the complete evidence register

56 slots over 7 pieces: 35 answered by a section, 2 by a linked document, 11 by a record, 8 not carried. How a slot is filled ↓

01 Essay Independent August 2026

Flagged in Hindsight

Five Canadian frauds, put back through the forensic screen ex ante

5,008 words4 figures6 tables2 recorded links22 min

Five Canadian accounting frauds with completed regulatory or judicial findings (Sino-Forest, Nortel, Poseidon Concepts, Livent, Philip Services), put back through the Beneish M-Score on the filings that existed before each collapse. Zero of three computable test years flag at the standard cut-off, and the piece types every miss by its cause: threshold, mechanism, model scope, or archive failure. Every figure carries a provenance label, and the computation ships with the page.

The eight slots for Flagged in Hindsight, 8 of 8 carried
QuestionWhat the piece set out to settle.What the screen said before anyone knew section
ContextWhat was already on the table when it started.Only completed findings section
ApproachThe method, fixed before the result.The specification used, and its one weakness section
EvidenceWhat the argument rests on, and how it is labelled.Every number here carries its provenance section
BuildWhat was made in order to answer it.How every figure was obtained section
FindingThe result, in its narrow form.Five cases, five different reasons the toolkit says nothing section
LimitationWhat the piece will not carry.Two cases were dropped, and the reasons matter section
ArtifactThe thing you can open.Open it An interactive bench rebuilds each score from the filed figures and lets the reader drag the cut-off to watch sensitivity buy false positives.

Read Flagged in Hindsight 8 of 8 slots carried

02 Essay Independent August 2026

Crucible Cockpit

Adversarial claim auditing: decompose, attack, grade what survives

612 words0 figures2 tables10 recorded linksinstrument

A system that refuses to answer questions directly: it decomposes each one into individually falsifiable claims, files a falsifier and an evidence tier with every claim, and sets attack agents against them on provenance, inference, selection, and anachronism. The answer is whatever the surviving claims can carry, at the tier of the weakest load-bearing link. Three runs are on the record, a hindsight-locked backtest and two live audits, with graveyards, rejected attacks, and unabridged transcripts.

The eight slots for Crucible Cockpit, 6 of 8 carried
QuestionWhat the piece set out to settle.A forecast is a pile of claims. Audit the pile. section
ContextWhat was already on the table when it started.Not carried
ApproachThe method, fixed before the result.Three runs, one engine section
EvidenceWhat the argument rests on, and how it is labelled.The vocabulary, once section
BuildWhat was made in order to answer it.Built on the three Crucible runs on the record: a backtest and two live audits, each with its graveyard, its rejected attacks and its unabridged transcript.
FindingThe result, in its narrow form.Crucible Run 0: the Bank of Canada backtest, Crucible Run B: the maturity-wall thesis, Crucible Run C: the goodwill-impairment thesis linked documents
LimitationWhat the piece will not carry.Not carried
ArtifactThe thing you can open.Open it The backtest run replays a question whose answer is now known with evidence locked at the cutoff, and returns UNDETERMINED: the leak test the live runs stand on.

Read Crucible Cockpit 6 of 8 slots carried

03 Reference Independent August 2026

The Brittle Network

A pre-registered protocol on the Late Bronze Age collapse

9,237 words4 figures16 tables1 recorded links40 min

A research protocol (methodology only, no results) for testing whether the Eastern Mediterranean collapsed around 1177 BCE because exogenous shocks struck a trade network optimised past the point of resilience, with the Sea Peoples as symptom rather than cause. Hypotheses, falsification conditions, data architecture, and the analysis plan are declared before any data is touched, and the abstract to be published if the central hypothesis fails is drafted in advance.

The eight slots for The Brittle Network, 7 of 8 carried
QuestionWhat the piece set out to settle.Scope, Premise Audit, and the Epistemic Contract section
ContextWhat was already on the table when it started.The historiographical arc section
ApproachThe method, fixed before the result.Formal specification section
EvidenceWhat the argument rests on, and how it is labelled.Evidence tiers section
BuildWhat was made in order to answer it.Data infrastructure section
FindingThe result, in its narrow form.Not carried
LimitationWhat the piece will not carry.“Prove or disprove” is not an available inferential mode section
ArtifactThe thing you can open.Open it Colour is used as a register throughout: each evidence stream (metals, network, textual, failure) carries its own colour, and nothing else does.

Read The Brittle Network 7 of 8 slots carried

04 Tool Independent August 2026

IFRS 15 Judgment Trainer

Sixty-two revenue scenarios, every answer anchored to the Handbook

3,946 words0 figures1 tables2 recorded links17 min

A drill on revenue recognition under IFRS 15: 29 determinate items scored against the standard and 33 judgment items that show their reasoning, every answer carrying its paragraph or illustrative example, verified against Part I of the CPA Canada Handbook, 2026 Edition. Each item names the trap beside the treatment, because the wrong answer you almost gave is the thing worth studying.

The eight slots for IFRS 15 Judgment Trainer, 3 of 8 carried
QuestionWhat the piece set out to settle.Not carried
ContextWhat was already on the table when it started.Not carried
ApproachThe method, fixed before the result.Not carried
EvidenceWhat the argument rests on, and how it is labelled.IFRS 15 Item Bank: Verification and Backfill linked document
BuildWhat was made in order to answer it.Built from the full text of IFRS 15 and its illustrative examples in Part I of the CPA Canada Handbook, four IFRIC agenda decisions and two CSA staff notices; the verification memo records what was read.
FindingThe result, in its narrow form.Not carried
LimitationWhat the piece will not carry.Not carried
ArtifactThe thing you can open.Open it The bank distinguishes what the standard settles from what it leaves to judgment, and scores only the former: a trainer that scores nothing teaches nothing, and one that scores judgment calls teaches something false.

Read IFRS 15 Judgment Trainer 3 of 8 slots carried

05 Essay Independent August 2026

Predictive History

The map, and the method that audits it

9,621 words11 figures14 tables1 recorded links42 min

Fifteen systems and 148 couplings, annotated by an audit instrument that was run against its own falsification test and failed it. Every one of eighty claims carries the verdict three independent raters gave it, blind to the author, and a mark for whether its evidence can be retrieved at all.

The eight slots for Predictive History, 8 of 8 carried
QuestionWhat the piece set out to settle.A prophet with a scoreboard section
ContextWhat was already on the table when it started.Fifteen systems, and what moves between them section
ApproachThe method, fixed before the result.How the method annotates the map section
EvidenceWhat the argument rests on, and how it is labelled.What the evidence actually rests on section
BuildWhat was made in order to answer it.The ledger, as an instrument section
FindingThe result, in its narrow form.The finding, in its narrow form section
LimitationWhat the piece will not carry.Two gaps still open, stated rather than skipped section
ArtifactThe thing you can open.Open it The instrument reports the result that undermines its own headline: panel-to-author agreement is 78 per cent, which is 22 per cent divergence against a 20 per cent withdrawal threshold the project set for itself before it knew the answer. The finding is published in its narrow form rather than its strong one, and 4 of 9 adversarial mutations are documented as still uncaught.

Read Predictive History 8 of 8 slots carried

06 Essay Independent August 2026

The Trillion-Dollar Vintage

A study edition of the AI capital-cycle adjudication

18,610 words16 figures15 tables0 recorded links81 min

Seventeen figures built from the analysis's own numbers, under one rule: the fork between the two anchors is never closed, and any mark that arithmetic produced rather than an instrument measured is drawn open.

The eight slots for The Trillion-Dollar Vintage, 8 of 8 carried
QuestionWhat the piece set out to settle.The question section
ContextWhat was already on the table when it started.A trillion dollars, mid-air section
ApproachThe method, fixed before the result.Rules of evidence section
EvidenceWhat the argument rests on, and how it is labelled.The machinery section
BuildWhat was made in order to answer it.Built from two documents in a strict chain of custody, the adjudication and the evidence pack it stands on, with every number, probability, ruling and conclusion transcribed unchanged and its evidence label kept.
FindingThe result, in its narrow form.The three answers section
LimitationWhat the piece will not carry.The fork: two instruments, 2.3× apart section
ArtifactThe thing you can open.Open it The largest essay here (Crucible Run B is the largest piece on the site), and the one that shows the method at full size. Two rival readings of the same capital cycle are carried side by side to the end rather than averaged into one, and the page corrects its own arithmetic in public where a later attribution changed the base.

Read The Trillion-Dollar Vintage 8 of 8 slots carried

07 Reference Independent September 2026

The tax base nobody discloses

A Dollarama valuation built on capital cost allowance

5,781 words5 figures4 tables0 recorded links25 min

No Canadian issuer publishes the undepreciated capital cost of its property, so a valuation that wants the real tax shield has to reconstruct it. This one backs Dollarama's tax base out of a deferred tax balance, proves the alternative reading implies a negative base the Income Tax Act forbids, runs the allowance under the rates and first year rules actually in force, and then reports that the tax work moves the answer by about two dollars a share against a fork worth sixty, which is the more useful of the two findings.

The eight slots for The tax base nobody discloses, 8 of 8 carried
QuestionWhat the piece set out to settle.01 The hypothesis section
ContextWhat was already on the table when it started.02 What the filing does say section
ApproachThe method, fixed before the result.03 Two bases, drawn against each other section
EvidenceWhat the argument rests on, and how it is labelled.10 The base year, and what was done to it section
BuildWhat was made in order to answer it.Built from the audited annual consolidated financial statements of Dollarama Inc. for the 52 weeks ended 1 February 2026, obtained from SEDAR+ and verified figure by figure against the pages cited; the Income Tax Regulations as consolidated on the Justice Laws website on 6 September 2026; and five years of weekly closes for the share and the S&P/TSX Composite, cached in content/market-data.json, which are the only inputs from neither a filing nor a statute. The schedule, the regression and both anchors are computed by build/valuation.py and the page is written by build/valuation_page.py, so no figure on it was typed by hand.
FindingThe result, in its narrow form.What actually moves the answer section
LimitationWhat the piece will not carry.11 What would make this wrong section
ArtifactThe thing you can open.Open it Two things are tested rather than asserted. The reconstructed tax base is run forward over a year it was not fitted to and asked to reproduce the current tax expense the issuer disclosed, and it lands 5.5 per cent short, which the page reports as a miss rather than tuning an input to close it. The beta is regressed from five years of weekly returns instead of assumed, correcting an earlier draft that had asserted a figure outside the interval the data supports. The valuation range is two anchors with no midpoint, because the disclosure that would justify a midpoint does not exist.

Read The tax base nobody discloses 8 of 8 slots carried

Notes on the reading

How to read a row. A slot marked section quotes a heading the piece itself carries and opens the piece at it. A slot marked linked document names another piece the corpus records a link to. The rest print a value this build already holds: the line the piece declares it was built from, or the artifact itself. A slot nothing answers says not carried, and is counted.

What is measured and what is not. The counts, the links and the figure on each entry are measured. Which heading answers which slot is a reading, declared in content/cases.json, and which three pieces lead is a second reading, declared in content/review.json. The build checks that every anchor exists, that every heading is quoted as the invariance record holds it, that every named document is a recorded link, and that the two review sets together are exactly the featured pieces with nothing counted twice; it does not check that either reading is the right one. Disagree with a placement and the files are the place to say so.

↑↓ moveEnter openEsc close

Keyboard

/
Search every piece
⌘K
The same search
g h
Home
g r
Research
g c
Coursework
g t
Tools
g l
Library
g a
About
?
This list