In hardware, fast and right have always been a trade-off.
We built the AI that ends it.
Most of a hardware program is not design — it is building a prototype, finding what broke, and building it again. ambrflow predicts which parts and which designs will fail before you order copper, so you spend the schedule building instead of rebuilding.
Founded out of Mila, Montreal — two PhDs, two prior deeptech startups.
- Frequency
- 10 MHz asked of a 1.0 MHz gain-bandwidth product — 10× beyond the crossing.
- Slew rate
- 56.5 V/µs required, 0.6 V/µs available — 94× short.
- Signal level
- V_OH guaranteed 1.4 V against a 1.65 V comparison point. The stage cannot toggle at all.
case002 · our own synthetic ECO test case, built from real KiCad library symbols. Not a customer board — we do not have a customer result to show yet, and we are not going to invent one.
Impact analysis.
A reviewer checks what the changed part touches: decoupling, pull-ups, antenna bias. Every one of them is fine. Then the timepulse leaves the module and lands on an op amp specified for a 1 Hz pulse, now asked to pass 10 MHz — and to clear a 1.65 V threshold the new module's output no longer reaches. Nothing on the changed net is wrong. The stage after it cannot work.
Where eighteen months goes
A simple design reaches a working product in about eighteen months. Only the first two are spent designing it.
Nine of the eighteen months are rebuilds. Not design. Not qualification.
Predict what fails before the first build and the rebuild months have nothing to do. That is the fifty percent.
How the prediction is made
Not a rule checker, and not a simulator. ambrflow compares your design against parts and designs that have already been built and already broken.
Schematic, layout, BOM and the constraints you actually care about — temperature range, duty cycle, expected life.
Your parts and topologies are matched against known designs, part histories and test results: what failed, under what conditions, and why.
A ranked list of what will fail — which part, which net, which design choice, and the conditions that trigger it. Every prediction carries its evidence.
An engineer accepts or rejects each one. Both are recorded, so the design carries its own justification into design review and certification.
What lands on your desk
Predictions are only useful if an engineer can act on them and defend them.
Ordered by how likely it is to bite you and how expensive it is to fix later — not alphabetically by reference designator.
The prior designs and test results the prediction came from. You can disagree with it, which is the point.
Every accepted and rejected prediction, kept. When a reviewer asks why the regulator was changed in week three, the answer exists.
Built by people who have shipped the hardware
Two PhDs, two prior deeptech startups, and one device we designed, predicted against, and built ourselves.
A MILA STARTUP, MONTREAL
Or put our engineers on your board
While the platform is in early access, we take hardware on directly — the same method, applied to your device.
One device, one deadline. We specify it, predict against it, and build it with you.
We stand up your hardware practice and stay through the first shipping revision.
We take an in-flight design and tell you where it will fail, while it is still cheap to hear.
Wearables and BLE · Robotics and motion · RF and telecom · Sensors and instrumentation
Tell us what keeps breaking.
Send the design, the temperature range, and the date you promised. We will tell you what we would look at first.