Dávid Szemán Quality leadership, applied to AI adoption

The work

15 things I built, and what each one taught me

Client names, product names and internal figures are deliberately absent. What is here is the practice, the specifics, and the number that mattered.

Built

Systems I designed and built end to end, and then had to make actually work.

Vision-to-catalogue extraction pipeline

2026

Photograph a physical item, get back the verified catalogue record.

  • Text recognition → candidate retrieval → ranking → eligibility rules → structured response
  • 190 items catalogued through it
  • Failed 6 of 7 real-world photographs on first contact; 5 root causes found and fixed
  • 30-item golden set, measured at top-1 and top-5 — 30/30 after fixes, zero regressions
  • 50 automated tests, duplicate protection, rate limiting, security hardening
  • One case left deliberately failing: the record does not exist in the source catalogue

Four of the five fixes were not AI fixes. Most "the model is bad" turns out to be input handling, retrieval and business logic.

  • n8n
  • Vision LLM
  • Cloudflare D1
  • TypeScript
Full case: When six of seven runs failed →

Designed, built, evaluated, operated

Enterprise AI adoption decision platform

2026

Decision-support software for choosing which AI use cases an organisation should fund and ship.

  • L0–L5 maturity model plus an 11-dimension AI operating profile layered on top
  • 11-gate use-case lifecycle, from intake to production approval
  • Use-case dossier carrying residual risk as an indication, never a verdict
  • Evaluation and pilot-evidence layer feeding the gates
  • Portfolio prioritisation with visible, movable weights — never a black-box score
  • Vendor assessment as its own entity, deliberately unscored (a single number would fake precision)
  • Adoption and realised-value tracking: plan versus actual variance, not judgement
  • Around ten design decisions documented with the alternative rejected

The design principle throughout: the system never decides. It makes visible what you are risking.

  • React
  • TypeScript
  • Zustand
Full case: Escaping POC hell →

Designed and built solo

Executive AI governance dashboard

2026

An interactive briefing surface that makes an AI mandate legible to a leadership audience.

  • Mandate gauge, value KPIs and a maturity view on one screen
  • Filterable, sortable, expandable book of work
  • An explicit RPA-versus-AI frame: when each is the right instrument
  • Governance gates and a first-90-days plan
  • Public and illustrative data marked distinctly, so nothing is passed off as verified
  • Self-contained, works offline, light and dark

Half of consulting is translation. This is the artefact that proves I can do the executive direction.

  • HTML
  • CSS
  • Vanilla JS

Designed and built

A personal AI operating system

2026

The infrastructure I run my own work on: memory, tickets, sync, budget rules, generated views.

  • A written memory policy: what is stored, where, and what is never stored
  • Canonical source of truth separated from a generated human-readable view
  • Idempotent generators, so three machines cannot fight over the output
  • Silent git synchronisation across a Mac and two Windows machines
  • Markdown ticket system with a CLI and a generated board — decisions survive the session
  • Custom agent skills that enforce the working rules automatically
  • Enforced cost discipline: exploratory fan-out requires stated scale and approval

Every problem it solves — provenance, single source of truth, auditability, cost control — is the enterprise AI platform problem at a size I can hold in my head.

  • Node.js (zero-dependency)
  • Git
  • Claude Code skills
Full case: Escaping POC hell →

Designed and built

Prompt evaluation harness

2026

A test bench that scores competing prompt versions instead of arguing about them.

  • Three summarisation prompt variants compared on the same inputs
  • Assertion-based checks plus LLM-rubric scoring, where a second model grades the output
  • Non-English test corpus, because quality claims rarely survive translation
  • Provider configuration so the same suite runs across models

Prompt quality is testable. Most teams treat it as taste because nobody built the bench.

  • promptfoo
  • LLM APIs
  • Python

Designed and built

A native iOS app, built with AI

2026

A planning app for people with ADHD — currently in testing, and deliberately without an AI feature.

  • Native SwiftUI, local-first, no account and no backend
  • Third full design revision, driven by real use rather than opinion
  • Calendar synchronisation, notifications, recurring schedules
  • An obvious AI feature — automatic task breakdown — sits on an explicit "not doing this" list
  • The reason is recorded: generating more items of variable quality is the worst thing you can do to an overwhelmed user

Knowing where AI does not belong in your own product is the same skill as knowing where it does not belong in someone’s business process.

  • SwiftUI
  • iOS 17+
  • EventKit

Specification, architecture, review — AI writes the code

Ran in production

Work that other people depended on — inside an employer, or for a paying customer.

Offline certification framework with LLM-generated content

2026

Desktop exam software, plus several hundred bilingual assessment items generated and validated by language models.

  • Timed, randomised exams with CSV results and PDF certificates
  • Encrypted question banks (AES-256-GCM, scrypt KDF) so items cannot be read off disk
  • Several hundred items across two languages, derived from existing structured test material
  • Quality enforced as rules: scenario constraint, answer-length ratio, distractor plausibility
  • Dual-perspective automated validation — candidate view and examiner view in one pass
  • Repair split by failure type: mechanical errors fixed in code, semantic errors by agent
  • Zero lines hand-edited

Two distinct capabilities in one project: AI as the tool that built the software, and AI as the engine producing what it runs on.

Designed and built with AI as development partner; designed the generation and validation system

Daily LLM reporting pipeline, in production

2024–2026

Test metrics, stakeholder summaries and risk reports generated every morning from live delivery data.

  • Pulled results, defect status and coverage from the delivery tooling
  • Replaced manual report-writing cycles by senior leads
  • Prompt engineering tuned for repeatable structured output
  • Automated quality checks on every generation, not spot checks
  • Same shape of report every morning, so a change in the numbers means a change in reality
  • Built inside a confidential client engagement — client and product are not named

The stated problem was speed. The real one was consistency — and naming that correctly is what made it worth building.

Self-initiated — nobody asked for it

Image classification for a small retail business

2026

A phone-first tool that sorts incoming second-hand stock into categories from photographs.

  • Mobile-first, deployed and in the owner’s hands
  • A three-category contract agreed with the customer before any model work
  • The decisive question was commercial, not technical: metered API plus engineering, or a flat subscription with a person in the loop
  • At their volume the subscription won — cheaper, simpler, and it degrades gracefully when the shop is busy

An advisor who cannot recommend the boring answer is not much of an advisor.

Built and deployed for a real customer

Operating practice

The habits underneath the projects. Less visible, and the reason the projects hold up.

Production workflow automations

2025–2026

Language models wired into real systems, with the failure handling that makes them survivable.

  • Webhook in, catalogue and database lookups in the middle, structured output back out
  • Schema validation, retries, rate-limit handling, duplicate protection
  • Behavioural verification: invoke it and read the execution output, because stored configuration can disagree with what actually ran

The model is rarely the hard part. What happens when it returns nothing is.

  • n8n
  • Webhooks
  • LLM APIs

Designed, built, operated

Cross-vendor context consolidation

2026

Pulled my own scattered AI memory out of three vendors and into a store I control.

  • Extracted from three separate assistant memories, including via computer-use automation
  • Every imported statement carries source, import date and status: confirmed, tool-claimed, outdated or contradictory
  • One file per topic, cross-linked, in plain text readable without the tool that produced it
  • Hard rules: no secrets ever, sensitive personal data only by explicit decision

A machine-generated summary of you is not automatically true. Provenance is the difference between context and folklore.

  • Markdown vault
  • Computer-use automation
  • Git

Designed and executed

Cross-model critique as a standing rule

2025–2026

Anything consequential gets argued against by a different model before I act on it.

  • An idea produced by one model is a hypothesis, not a finding
  • The instruction is "argue against this", not "check this"
  • Different vendors, because different training means different blind spots
  • It catches the dangerous failure: a plan that is coherent in every paragraph and built on an unchecked premise

Confidence is the one thing these systems supply for free. A second opinion is the cheapest correction available.

  • Multi-vendor LLMs

Working rule, enforced in my own tooling

Getting from zero to a defensible briefing

2026

A repeatable method for learning an unfamiliar industry fast without fooling myself.

  • A structured document, not a chat log — every claim carries source and confidence
  • Jargon explained inline the first time it appears; if I cannot write the explanation, I have not understood it
  • Verifiable fact separated from inference, contradictions marked rather than smoothed over
  • Ends with the questions the research could not answer

A fluent summary of a field you do not know is indistinguishable from an accurate one. The method exists to keep those apart.

  • Multi-vendor LLMs
  • Web research

Designed and used

Guardrails that stop an AI overclaiming

2026

Constraint systems that make it structurally hard for a model to say something untrue on your behalf.

  • An enumerated list of claims that may never be made — not implied, written down
  • Mandatory provenance: a statement that cannot be traced to a source does not get made
  • A defined way to say "we do not know", because without one the system will invent
  • Established fact kept visibly separate from inference
  • Applied to this site too: employers’ clients are never named, and what I have not done is on the About page

Every organisation deploying AI fears the same thing — that it will confidently say something false in their name. This is the answer to that fear.

  • Prompt architecture
  • Policy files

Designed and applied across my own systems

Self-hosted infrastructure

2024–2026

A home server carrying automation and media services, kept in sync with two other machines.

  • Linux node running home automation, media services and scheduled jobs
  • Deliberate boundary about what data may leave the network, decided in advance
  • Everything generated must be reproducible from its source, or two machines eventually disagree

Small-scale data governance, with the same questions an enterprise asks: which copy is authoritative, and what is allowed to leave.

  • Linux
  • Home Assistant
  • Docker

Built and operated

If you want the reasoning

How I decide what is worth building

All of it came out of the same five questions — where the real bottleneck is, whether AI is the right instrument, what the process should look like, how we prove it works, and what has to exist for it to survive past the pilot.

Read the method →