PI Quick Decision Pack
A rapid go / no-go reading surface for principal investigators, laboratory leads, and technical research groups considering entry into the Sal-Meter / CAIS program.
This page is an orientation surface, not a canonical specification. It exists to help a serious PI decide quickly whether this program is worth entering now, what kind of work would actually be done, and which canonical texts must be read before commitment.
Current public status: this page supports pre-opening PI decision-making under the present execution order of External Layer-0 → SICS Internal Phase 0–2b → LOCK 1 / LOCK 2 review → broader opening. Current work remains research-stage, non-diagnostic, and non-therapeutic.
What This Page Answers
Yes, if your team can evaluate an early but structured research program within strict terminology, boundary, and public-claims control.
You would evaluate a defined measurement architecture, a staged validation path, and a bounded participation surface rather than a vague philosophical proposition.
No. This is a pre-opening decision surface. The broader opening belongs after internal sequence and lock review.
Read the canonical anchors below, then move to System Overview and Technical Snapshot, then return to For PIs for next-step coordination.
Why Enter Now
This is the stage where serious labs can still shape validation quality, boundary discipline, and evidence culture before broader opening.
The program is framed as a research-stage interface and validation problem, not as an uncontrolled public product claim surface.
The PI lane is intentionally staged: orientation first, overview second, technical snapshot third, then deeper discussion.
What a Participating Lab Would Actually Do
- Review the current Sal-Meter / CAIS architecture as a measurement and validation program, not as a finished market product.
- Assess whether your team can work inside strict naming, compliance, and public-claims boundaries.
- Map where your lab fits best: feasibility, instrumentation, sensing, validation, statistics, protocol execution, or replication support.
- Decide whether a 3–6 month exploratory participation path is realistic for your bandwidth and expertise.
- Move only after reading the canonical layer that fixes designation, boundary, governance, and implementation rationale.
This page does not authorize medical, diagnostic, therapeutic, certification, or compliance claims.
Current Program Order
External feasibility layer
Bounded external technical feasibility and early evaluation. This is not the same as the later internal phase architecture.
SICS internal validation sequence
Internal staged work continues through the defined sequence before broader opening logic is activated.
Threshold and governance review
Opening logic belongs after core validation thresholds and review gates, not before them.
Expanded participation surface
Broader competition, SDK-facing expansion, and wider external structuring belong after the locked internal sequence.
Must-Read Canonical Anchors Before a Yes
Sal-Meter Canonical Definition
Read this first to understand what the designation “Sal-Meter” is allowed to mean.
CAIS Compliance Boundary
Read this second to understand which conditions must be met before compliance-related language is legitimate.
Open Competition Charter
Read this third to see how participation and evaluation are governed without dissolving the canonical layer.
From Theory to Implementation
Read this fourth to understand why the program is framed as a proof-of-concept bridge from philosophy to infrastructure.
Decision Routes
Go next to System Overview
Use this when your team wants the use-case map, phase structure, and overall authority set in one place.
Go next to Technical Snapshot
Use this when the decision hinges on technical architecture, channel logic, and buildable framing.
Return to For PIs
Use this when your team wants the broader participation surface, current status view, and next-step contact logic.
Current Governance Framing
ESL
Electrochemical Systems Lead for measurement consistency, device pathway discipline, instrumentation coherence, and experimental execution at the device layer.
EStL
Evidence & Standardization Lead for evidence integrity, schema discipline, leakage control, reporting logic, and standardization governance.
Public PI-facing pages should reflect the ESL / EStL structure consistently and avoid older public-facing role language that conflicts with the current external surface.
Questions a Serious PI Should Ask Internally
- Can our lab operate inside a research-stage, non-diagnostic boundary without drifting into overclaim?
- Do we have a natural fit in feasibility, instrumentation, sensing, validation, statistics, or replication?
- Can we commit a bounded exploratory effort instead of demanding a fully commercialized surface on day one?
- Are we willing to work inside a layered architecture where canonical authority and helper surfaces are deliberately separated?