Living neural substrate
Human forebrain organoids maintained on a multi-electrode array form a biological computing substrate — not a software simulation. Activity is measured from tissue that develops, adapts, and responds.
Private beta · 3 partner seats
Biological neural decision assays for professionals who cannot afford the wrong experiment.
Aurelia is the commercial service layer on an authorized living-neural computing environment. We convert measured network activity into desk-specific decisions, dossiers, and exports — before your next animal line, core battery, or mammalian DNT study is purchased.
Three approved professional applications. One partner organization per desk. Limited enrollment now open.
What we offer
A complete testing service — not a laboratory login.
You bring program context within the authorized beta scope. Aurelia configures the desk-specific protocol, coordinates the biological compute test through our authorized technology partner, captures multi-electrode activity, scores the session, and delivers professional outputs your team can act on.
We operate the workflow, QC, analysis, and reporting layer. The underlying biological computing environment is run by an external authorized provider — not by Enterprise Technology Group. Testing during this beta remains within the scope currently authorized for the program.
Deliverables are built for professional decision-making: desk-specific dashboards, comparison against vehicle and reference arms, QC that rejects artifact before scoring, and exportable dossiers your study director, safety reviewer, or NAM lead can take into internal governance — not a raw electrode export your team still has to interpret.
1Input
2Configure
3Biological test
4Capture
5Analysis
6Report
- Your submissionCompound, substance, or program context within the authorized beta scope
- Test configurationDesk-specific protocol, references, and QC thresholds
- Biological compute testLiving human forebrain networks on a 32-electrode array
- Signal captureSpike trains, bursts, coupling, and evoked responses
- Computational analysisScoring, comparison, and integrity indices
- Professional reportDashboard views, dossier, and downloadable exports
How the technology works
Living tissue. Measured activity. Computational decisions.
Biological neural computing uses living neuronal systems as an experimental substrate. Stimulation and pharmacological conditions perturb the network; electrodes record responses that software-only models cannot replicate on the same substrate. Aurelia turns that experimental output into information a study director, safety reviewer, or NAM lead can file.
Stimulation and pharmacology
Encoded electrical stimulation and bath-applied compounds perturb the network. Vehicle, convulsant, sedative, and test-item conditions create a controlled experimental axis.
Observable activity
Spike timing, burst structure, synchrony, afterdischarge, and evoked responses are captured continuously. QC rejects common-mode artifact and silent electrodes before scoring.
Computational scoring
Repeated measurements are aggregated into cohort indices, integrity bands, and comparison charts — the same class of readout a study director or reviewer already understands.
Patterns over time
Plasticity probes and titration arms reveal whether a network adapts, escalates, or recovers — signals that static software-only models cannot reproduce on living tissue.
Decision layer
Aurelia converts experimental output into ADVANCE / HOLD / KILL language, dossiers, and exports your team can file — without requiring you to operate the underlying laboratory.
Three professional applications
One partner seat per desk. Equal weight. Full workflow.
We are selecting three professional organizations — one for each approved use case — to validate Aurelia before broader commercial release. Early partners who help prove the workflow may receive preferential long-term access terms after the beta concludes.
Desk I · Seizure-liability programs
Epilepsy discovery
Epilepsy biotech, CNS discovery leads, and medical/scientific owners who must know whether a named chemotype is ictal before a rat ever sees it.
Would this compound make a living human network seize?
This desk scores hyperexcitability the way a seizure-liability reviewer already thinks: spike rate, burst structure, synchrony, and afterdischarge on living human forebrain networks — then ADVANCE, HOLD, or KILL for the series you named.
A typical rat CNS functional observational battery sits near six figures once you include follow-up EEG and the opportunity cost of advancing the wrong scaffold. One hyperexcitable chemotype can write that invoice before anyone has human-network evidence on the table.
During the beta, your organization brings program context within the authorized scope. Aurelia configures the desk protocol, coordinates the biological test, captures multi-electrode activity, and returns a decision dossier your team can take into portfolio triage — not a raw export you still have to interpret.
The readout is built to sit beside the in vivo analogues you are trying not to run first: maximal electroshock, 6 Hz, subconvulsive PTZ, kindling, and video-EEG follow-up. Human tissue first; animal line second — only when the evidence says so.
Typical fit
- Named chemotype or lead series before the rat FOB is booked
- Portfolio triage when several scaffolds compete for the same tox budget
- Medical/scientific owner preparing a gate meeting with discovery
- Teams comparing human-network indices to classical seizure models
- Anyone who needs ADVANCE / HOLD / KILL language, not a notebook handoff
Seizure index
76
Vs vehicle
+29
Burst rate
↑
Verdict
HOLD
Example finding
Illustrative desk readout — not a completed customer study.
The problem
A typical rat CNS functional observational battery sits near six figures when you include follow-up EEG and the opportunity cost of advancing the wrong series. One hyperexcitable chemotype can write that invoice before anyone has human-network evidence.
How our testing helps
Aurelia scores hyperexcitability on living human forebrain networks — rate, bursts, synchrony, afterdischarge — using vehicle, convulsant, and sedative references on one axis. You receive an ADVANCE / HOLD / KILL decision for the chemotype, not a notebook export.
What you receive
- Seizure-liability index and cohort comparison
- Raster and burst visualizations (illustrative beta output)
- In vivo analogue mapping — what you are trying not to run first
- One-page decision dossier for the series
- Tissue passport with door-log QC and coupling context
Financial value
The economic mechanism is early termination: a comparatively small human-network engagement may prevent a six-figure animal line from being purchased for a chemotype that already showed ictal liability on living tissue.
- Kill a bad chemotype before the rat FOB is booked
- Avoid EEG follow-up on a series already flagged ictal
- Reduce wasted medicinal chemistry cycles on hyperexcitable scaffolds
- Shorten time-to-decision for portfolio triage
- Lower opportunity cost of advancing the wrong NCE
Desk II · ICH S7A gate
CNS safety pharmacology
Safety pharmacology, toxicology, and CSO teams whose molecule is not an epilepsy drug — and still might seize, sedate, or scramble a network before IND.
Does this molecule still justify a rodent FOB — or a follow-up EEG — for CNS risk?
This desk is for bidirectional CNS risk on human tissue: hyperexcitability and silence. Convulsant and sedative references prove the assay moves both ways before you spend on an Irwin / FOB or a Tier II EEG.
ICH S7A still sends most programs to a rodent core battery. Seizure liability is among the most common preclinical CNS surprises — including for non-CNS indications. A late EEG is often how that surprise becomes an invoice.
Aurelia compares nominal bath concentration to unbound Cmax the way a study director already thinks. You receive exposure-margin context, FOB neurofunctional domains mapped onto the array, and gate language that survives a core-battery meeting.
The beta is not a substitute for the ICH S7A package. It is how you decide whether that rodent FOB, or an EEG follow-up, is still the next rational spend — or whether human-network evidence already answered the question.
Typical fit
- Non-CNS programs that still carry latent seizure or sedation risk
- Safety pharmacology leads scoping the core battery before IND
- Toxicology owners comparing bath exposure to projected human coverage
- CSO review when discovery and safety disagree on timing
- Teams that need documented gate logic, not another exploratory notebook
Seizure index
61
Vs vehicle
+18
Cmax margin
2.1×
Verdict
HOLD
Example finding
Illustrative desk readout — not a completed customer study.
The problem
The ICH S7A core battery sends you to an Irwin / FOB in rat. Seizure is among the most common preclinical CNS surprises, including for non-CNS programs. A late EEG is how that surprise becomes an invoice.
How our testing helps
Aurelia maps bidirectional CNS risk on human tissue — convulsant and sedative references prove the assay moves both ways. Bath concentration is compared to unbound Cmax the way a study director already thinks, before you buy the FOB.
What you receive
- Exposure margin vs nominal bath concentration
- FOB neurofunctional domains mapped onto the array
- Comparative condition charts (illustrative beta output)
- Safety gate language for core-battery meetings
- Downloadable decision dossier
Financial value
The economic mechanism is gate timing: human-network evidence before the core battery can eliminate an unnecessary FOB, or give you a documented reason to book it with the right endpoints.
- Defer or scope the rodent FOB until human-network risk is understood
- Avoid follow-up EEG on a molecule already flagged at physiologic coverage
- Reduce rework between discovery and safety pharmacology
- Focus core-battery spend on molecules that cleared the human-network gate
- Cut meeting cycles spent debating whether Irwin is justified yet
Desk III · NAM / OECD-aligned
Developmental neurotoxicity
Agrochemical, industrial chemical, and pediatric-CNS teams who would rather not commission a full mammalian DNT study to learn that a substance disrupts network assembly.
Does this substance disrupt a living human network enough that a mammalian DNT study is still the next spend?
This desk scores network integrity on developing human circuits — burst timing, coupling, and activity versus vehicle. It is the network-function piece you can run on living organoids before a mammalian study is quoted.
OECD TG 426-class DNT in vivo is slow, scarce, and often quoted near seven figures. Regulators are standing up an in-vitro DNT battery that includes neuronal network activity on MEA — but most teams still discover network disruption late.
Aurelia returns an integrity index, coupling summaries, and weight-of-evidence language you can place beside an IATA or AOP narrative. The output is built for NAM reviewers who ask whether assembly and activity still look like a developing human circuit.
This is not a complete OECD DNT-IVB submission and not TG 426. It is human-network evidence to decide whether that mammalian program is still justified — or whether your next dollar belongs in a different tier of testing.
Typical fit
- Agrochemical registrants building OECD-aligned NAM packages
- Industrial chemical teams screening before a TG 426 quote lands
- Pediatric-CNS programs weighing mammalian DNT timing
- Regulatory affairs owners assembling IATA / weight-of-evidence cards
- Anyone who needs network integrity vs vehicle in one defensible readout
Network integrity
84
Vs vehicle
+12
Coverage
1.4×
Verdict
HOLD
Example finding
Illustrative desk readout — not a completed customer study.
The problem
OECD TG 426-class DNT in vivo is slow, scarce, and often quoted near seven figures. Regulators are standing up an in-vitro DNT battery that includes neuronal network activity on MEA — but most teams still discover network disruption late.
How our testing helps
Aurelia scores network integrity on developing human circuits — burst timing, coupling, and activity versus vehicle. This is the network-function piece you can run on living organoids before a mammalian study is quoted.
What you receive
- Network integrity index vs vehicle
- AOP / key-event placement for your IATA
- Coupling and burst regularity summaries
- Weight-of-evidence card for NAM reviewers
- Illustrative integrity band report
Financial value
The economic mechanism is study avoidance: a network-integrity engagement may show that a mammalian DNT program is not the next rational spend — or that it is, with evidence attached.
- Decide whether TG 426 is still justified before it is commissioned
- Reduce failed mammalian studies on substances that already disrupt assembly
- Focus NAM spend on substances that passed the network gate
- Lower external lab queue time for the wrong substance class
- Accelerate weight-of-evidence packages for regulatory dialogue
Example results & reporting
What arrives after the test — illustrated, not fabricated.
Beta participants receive desk-specific dashboards, comparison views, and downloadable dossiers. The samples below are illustrative outputs from the demonstration studio — labeled as examples, not completed customer studies.
Executive summary
One-page verdict with rationale
Condition comparison
Cohort indices across arms
Raster view
Illustrative spike visualization
Exposure margin
Bath vs unbound Cmax context
Integrity band
Network vs vehicle baseline
Suggested next actions
Hold, advance, or kill guidance
Illustrative beta output
Sample executive summary
- Verdict: HOLD
- Cohort seizure index: illustrative
- Rationale: demonstration protocol
Illustrative beta output
Sample comparative analysis
- Vehicle vs test item
- Convulsant reference arm
- Exposure margin context
The economic case
Learn earlier. Waste less. Make better decisions.
The core value is timing: useful experimental evidence on living human networks before the expensive downstream commitment. A comparatively small testing engagement may help prevent significantly larger spends on animal studies, rework, personnel hours, and portfolio mistakes — without guaranteeing any specific savings outcome.
Epilepsy discovery
The economic mechanism is early termination: a comparatively small human-network engagement may prevent a six-figure animal line from being purchased for a chemotype that already showed ictal liability on living tissue.
CNS safety pharmacology
The economic mechanism is gate timing: human-network evidence before the core battery can eliminate an unnecessary FOB, or give you a documented reason to book it with the right endpoints.
Developmental neurotoxicity
The economic mechanism is study avoidance: a network-integrity engagement may show that a mammalian DNT program is not the next rational spend — or that it is, with evidence attached.
Private beta program
Restricted enrollment. Professional users only.
We are selecting a small group of professional organizations to help validate three high-value commercial applications of biological computing before broader release. Participation is limited, reviewed, and scoped.
- Three partner seats — one per approved use case
- Professional organizations operating within the authorized beta scope
- Controlled testing authorization through our technology partner
- Early access to workflows, reporting, and findings before general availability
- Feedback may be requested to harden the commercial product
- Not every application will be accepted
- Early partners may receive preferential long-term access after successful validation
Experimental findings are not established clinical conclusions. Aurelia does not operate the underlying biological laboratory, does not imply regulatory approval, and does not offer unrestricted laboratory access. Research use. Not GLP.
Be among the first organizations to test the next generation of biological computing
Three desks. Three partners. Apply for the use case that matches your program — we review every submission and respond to qualified organizations directly.
Apply
Request beta access
Short form. No payment information. We use your answers to qualify fit for the current beta scope — not to onboard every organization that applies.
One partner seat per desk. Three desks. One application per use case.
We are selecting three professional organizations — one each for epilepsy discovery, CNS safety pharmacology, and developmental neurotoxicity — to validate Aurelia before broader commercial release.
Applications are reviewed manually. We respond at the work email you provide. Enrollment is intentionally limited: not every submission is accepted, and we do not maintain a waitlist beyond the current beta window.
Accepted partners work within the authorized testing scope. Aurelia configures the desk protocol, coordinates the biological test, delivers scored outputs and dossiers, and may request feedback on dashboards and reporting to harden the commercial product.
Early partners who help prove the workflow may receive preferential long-term access terms after successful validation. Experimental findings are research use — not GLP, not regulatory approval, and not a substitute for your own internal governance.
What we look for
- Professional organization with a live program aligned to one of the three desks
- Study director, safety pharmacology, toxicology, CSO, or NAM lead as primary contact
- Authority to commit program context and review outputs internally
- Willingness to complete at least one scoped test during the beta period
- Constructive feedback on dossiers, dashboards, and decision language
After you submit
- Submission is acknowledged on screen — no payment is collected
- Qualified organizations receive follow-up within a few business days
- Accepted partners receive scope confirmation and a quotation path for access
- If the fit is not right for this window, we say so directly and briefly