Integrated Architecture
The Complete Observability Stack
Three instruments. Three perspectives. One truth.
A single instrument's finding is a hypothesis. Two instruments corroborating is evidence. Three is truth. The architecture exists to turn three partial views into one complete picture.
Instrument Plane
Three Instruments, Three Perspectives
Each instrument touches a different part of the network. Independence is the architecture — disagreement between instruments IS the diagnostic.
Evolver
Emblasoft
Validates the Core
Cloud-native protocol-level simulation engine. Software agents inject synthetic L7 traffic into core network nodes.
Perspective
Inward — tests nodes, protocols, load, functional regression from inside the core
Network touch point
Core Network — EPC, IMS, SBC, UPF, HSS/UDM, 5G Core NFs
Protocols
Components
- PureLoad Workers
- simulation-control API
- Protocol JARs
- Cranium
- Uranium (UPF)
Primary functions
ANTS
Aubay
Validates the Service
RTU-based E2E active testing from real handsets in real locations. 2G–5G SA. Voice/data/SMS/OTT. Drive test. 60+ country roaming. Revenue assurance.
Perspective
Outward — tests what the subscriber actually experiences, from the field
Network touch point
RAN + Edge + Field — RTUs in cabinets, drive test routes, enterprise premises, roaming partners, fixed links
Protocols
Components
- ANTS-SA (E2E active)
- ANTS-GRA (60+ country roaming)
- ANTS-RA (Revenue Assurance)
- ANTS-DT (Drive Test + GeoANTS)
- Nexus AI (Architect, Sentinel, Explorer)
Primary functions
nScan
Emblasoft
Validates the Truth
Passive monitoring platform. Taps live network traffic. Sees every real session, every subscriber, every signalling message.
Perspective
Transparent — observes everything happening, identifies who is affected
Network touch point
All Interfaces — S1-MME, S6a, N3, N4, Gx/Gy/Gz, SS7 links, Diameter hubs, GTP tunnels, billing mediation
Protocols
Components
- Passive Probe
- Subscriber Trace (per-IMSI)
- Signalling Monitor
- CDR Correlation
- TrueVoice
- NetQPro
Primary functions
System Design
Four-Plane Architecture
The architecture is organised into four planes. Data flows upward from the network through independent instruments into a correlation engine that produces actionable decisions.
Plane 4 — Decision
Autonomy Levels L1–L4
L4 requires ALL THREE instruments. No single tool can both detect and validate its own fix.
decides from
Plane 3 — Correlation Engine
Where truth emerges
Temporal Alignment
Same event seen by three instruments at the same time?
Causal Chain
Protocol fault → service impact → subscriber loss?
Economic Impact
Subscribers × ARPU × duration = € at risk
No single vendor owns the truth. The correlation engine is the only place where findings from all three instruments meet.
correlates from
Plane 2 — Instrument Plane
Three independent data paths
Evolver
Validates the Core
ANTS
Validates the Service
nScan
Validates the Truth
Each instrument produces data independently. Disagreement between them IS the diagnostic signal.
observes
Plane 1 — Network
The thing being observed
Core
5G Core, EPC, IMS, SBC, UPF
Evolver injects here
RAN
eNB, gNB, O-RAN
ANTS tests from here
Transport
IP, GTP tunnels, MPLS
nScan taps here
Services
SMSC, VAS, Billing, CDN
ANTS-RA audits here
Interconnect
SS7, Diameter hubs, Roaming
nScan observes here
Coverage Matrix
Function Coverage Across All Three Instruments
Every function has a primary instrument (detects), a confirmer (validates the cause), and a quantifier (measures impact).
Closed-Loop Validation
The Validation Loop — From Detection to Confirmed Resolution
This is what makes L3/L4 autonomy credible. Without all three instruments in the loop, the validation step is incomplete — you fixed something but you cannot prove the fix worked at all three levels.
Detects protocol degradation
Active probe finds latency anomaly on S1-U interface after RAN software update
Confirms service impact in field
RTU in affected area reports MOS drop from 4.1 to 2.8 on VoLTE calls
Quantifies subscriber damage
1,247 subscribers affected, 89 with ARPU >€50, total €12.4K/day at risk
Establishes causal chain + economic impact
Protocol fault → service degradation → subscriber impact confirmed across all three
Autonomous action or human alert
At L3/L4: automatic rollback triggered. At L1/L2: engineer receives correlated alert
Re-tests after remediation
Post-rollback regression suite confirms protocol integrity restored
Confirms service restored
RTU reports MOS recovered to 4.0+ within 12 minutes
Confirms subscriber recovery
All 1,247 subscriber sessions normalised. Zero churn events in 48h follow-up
Diagnostic Power
Why Disagreement Is the Signal
When instruments agree, the picture is clear. When they disagree, the disagreement itself tells you exactly where the problem lies.
| Evolver | ANTS | nScan | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| PASS | FAIL | — | RAN or transport problem — between core and field |
| FAIL | PASS | — | Compensating mechanism hiding a real core fault |
| PASS | PASS | FAIL | Capacity problem visible only under real subscriber load |
| PASS | PASS | PASS | System healthy — all three layers confirmed |
| FAIL | FAIL | PASS | Service failure confirmed — subscribers unaffected (yet) |
| FAIL | FAIL | FAIL | Full outage — all layers impacted |
Operational Evidence
49 Documented Use Cases
Every combination of instruments produces use cases that no single tool or pair can address alone.
8
Evolver solo
6
nScan solo
10
ANTS solo
8
Evolver + nScan
6
Evolver + ANTS
5
nScan + ANTS
6
All three
The architectural principle in one sentence:
Evolver validates the core. ANTS validates the service. nScan validates the truth. Together they are the complete observability stack — from protocol to field to live subscriber.