Skip to content
jonathanhodak.com

AI systems / engineering leadership

AI systems I build, run, and improve.

I build and operate software and AI systems daily, from architecture and infrastructure to tools and products. My personal lab compresses the engineering feedback loop; firsthand results sharpen the judgment I bring to enterprise platforms.

Current platform workMission Control
  • AI engineering strategy
  • Platform architecture
  • Engineering enablement
  • Agent systems
  • Model strategy
  • Evaluation and evidence
  • Infrastructure
  • Technical execution
Operating systemFIG. 01
StrategyArchitectureEvidence
A stylized view of work moving through an AI engineering system.

Mission Control / system behavior

Watch work move through the system.

Simplified views of systems I design, build, operate, or apply in my engineering work. Most come from my own workshop; the enterprise view describes my professional architecture work across systems owned by many teams.

Selected system view: Models

Active system view

BUILT · BENCHMARKED · OPERATED

Choose intelligence by the work and its constraints.

03 / 06
System view
I benchmark local and hosted models against task quality, context, latency, and cost. One AMD Strix Halo machine with 128 GB unified memory handles my primary local-AI workload. Specialist models remain a future path under evaluation.
Engineering value
These experiments inform how I route repeatable work to the least expensive intelligence that reliably solves it and where future specialization may help.
Models — conceptual system topologyAn architectural illustration, not live telemetry or model availability. Prefer deterministic software or a small capable model; use frontier reasoning when the task warrants it, based on quality and constraints. Execution mode: once. Components: Engineering task (Difficulty · failure cost); Assess constraints (Privacy · context · latency); Compare evidence (Quality · cost · reliability); Deterministic software (Known structure · rules); Small local model (Private · fast inference); Specialist model (Future · after evaluation); Frontier model (Complex reasoning); Human escalation (High risk · uncertainty); Validated outcome (Route from evidence). Ordered stages: Engineering task; Assess constraints; Compare evidence; Deterministic software and Small local model and Frontier model; Validated outcome. Connections: Engineering task to Assess constraints; Assess constraints to Compare evidence; Compare evidence to Deterministic software; Compare evidence to Small local model; Compare evidence to Specialist model (conditional); Compare evidence to Frontier model; Compare evidence to Human escalation (when risk requires) (conditional); Deterministic software to Validated outcome; Small local model to Validated outcome; Specialist model to Validated outcome (conditional); Frontier model to Validated outcome; Human escalation to Validated outcome (conditional). Optional conditional paths are shown but do not run in the illustrated sequence.Engineering taskDifficulty · failure costAssess constraintsPrivacy · context ·latencyCompare evidenceQuality · cost ·reliabilityDeterministicsoftwareKnown structure · rulesSmall local modelPrivate · fast inferenceSpecialist modelFuture · after evaluationFrontier modelComplex reasoningHuman escalationHigh risk · uncertaintyValidated outcomeRoute from evidence
  • idle
  • incoming
  • active
  • outgoing
  • settled

Conceptual sequence · not live telemetry.

Execution sequence

  1. 01
    Engineering taskEngineering task → Assess constraints
  2. 02
    Assess constraintsAssess constraints → Compare evidence
  3. 03
    Compare evidenceCompare evidence → Deterministic software · Compare evidence → Small local model · Compare evidence → Frontier model
  4. 04
    Deterministic software + Small local model + Frontier modelDeterministic software → Validated outcome · Small local model → Validated outcome · Frontier model → Validated outcome
  5. 05
    Validated outcome

Conditional paths

  • Compare evidence → Specialist model · Future · after evaluation
  • Compare evidence → Human escalation · High risk · uncertainty · when risk requires
  • Specialist model → Validated outcome
  • Human escalation → Validated outcome
Conceptual execution · explicit dependencies · not live telemetry
Illustrative architecture / grounded in engineering workExplore system

Current work / enterprise AI platform

Architecture spanning six or more engineering teams.

In my current contractor engagement in a large enterprise retail environment, I contribute architecture to an internal AI platform initiative. I help connect capabilities built by separate teams into a coherent platform and shared employee experience; those teams remain responsible for their systems.

How the scope grew

I contribute cross-team architecture and technical direction. The participating teams build and remain responsible for their systems.

Architecture focus

Connect independent capabilities into a usable platform.

  • Cross-team architectureService boundaries · Integration patterns · Common architecture
  • Application and workflow architectureApplication architecture · Navigation · Workflows
  • Shared AI platform capabilitiesPlatform consolidation · Reusable patterns · Deployment and runtime
  • Engineering enablementStandards · Developer enablement · AI-assisted practice
Explore the platform architecture

AI leadership / operating model

Enterprise AI is an engineering system.

Enterprise AI adoption depends on coordinated engineering across people, platform, models, governance, and product delivery. Model strategy sits inside that wider operating system.

  1. DOMAIN 01

    People

    Build capability and shared practice across engineering teams.

    • Training
    • Adoption
    • Engineering practices
    • Standards
  2. DOMAIN 02

    Platform

    Make useful AI capabilities available through a coherent system.

    • Context
    • Tools
    • Orchestration
    • Evaluation
    • Observability
  3. DOMAIN 03

    Models

    Match model capability to the task and its operating constraints.

    • Routing
    • Cost
    • Latency
    • Capability
    • Local and hosted
  4. DOMAIN 04

    Governance

    Make authorization, validation, and review proportional to risk.

    • Authorization
    • Validation
    • Proportional review
    • Evidence
  5. DOMAIN 05

    Product delivery

    Connect the engineering system to product work and business outcomes.

    • Build
    • Operate
    • Deliver outcomes
Evidence from delivery should shape governance, platform architecture, and model choices as the operating system evolves.

Engineering principles

Direction, expressed as practice.

A system-level approach to making AI useful, affordable, observable, and safe inside real engineering work.

  • 01

    Increase engineering leverage

    AI should increase engineering leverage without removing engineering discipline.

  • 02

    Prefer deterministic systems first

    Use a small, deterministic tool when it can do the job; reserve model reasoning, including frontier models, for work that benefits from it.

  • 03

    Match intelligence to the task

    Use the least expensive model that reliably solves the task, considering latency, privacy, and the cost of failure.

  • 04

    Share platform capabilities; keep domain ownership clear

    Centralize reusable AI capabilities while product teams continue to own their domain behavior and data.

See all eight engineering principles

Career / increasing scope

A progression from operations to AI platform architecture.

My work has moved from training and operational process through engineering, architecture, management, and founding roles to enterprise AI platform architecture.

  1. 01

    Early leadership

    Operational leadership, training, and process

  2. 02

    Engineering foundation

    Web engineering, experimentation, and systems

  3. 03

    Technical leadership

    Mentorship, standards, and platform modernization

  4. 04

    Enterprise architecture

    Front-End Architect

  5. 05

    Engineering management

    Engineering Manager

  6. 06

    Founding engineering

    Founding Engineer

  7. 07

    Current

    Architecture spanning an enterprise AI initiative

See selected leadership evidence

AI Lab / systems and experiments

Working systems and experiments.

Built work, benchmarks, active tests, and future investigations each have their own stage. Results from real use inform the next iteration and my professional judgment.

  • TOPIC 01
    Benchmarking

    Local model performance and routing

    I benchmark local inference on my AMD Strix Halo machine with 128 GB unified memory, comparing context, quantization, runtimes, latency, and task quality before changing routing.

  • TOPIC 02
    Built and used

    Deterministic code exploration

    I built and use indexes, syntax-aware analysis, repository graphs, and targeted retrieval to find relevant code before model reasoning.

  • TOPIC 03
    Testing

    Context-size experiments

    I am testing how context selection and size affect task quality, completeness, latency, and cost.

View the full AI Lab

Technical depth / supporting detail

Hands-on depth, in context.

I stay hands-on across the systems I architect. The tools matter as part of the broader engineering work, not as a list on their own.

I still build and operate across applications, APIs, data, models, and infrastructure. That firsthand work informs my architecture and leadership decisions.

Applications and services

  • TypeScript
  • React
  • React Router
  • Node.js
  • APIs
  • OAuth

Data and retrieval

  • PostgreSQL
  • Supabase
  • Vector search
  • RAG

AI systems

  • MCP
  • Local inference
  • Model orchestration
  • Agent systems
  • Evaluation
  • Observability

Platform and infrastructure

  • Linux
  • Docker
  • Vercel
  • Deployment systems

Contact

Compare notes on what’s working.

I’m glad to compare notes on AI engineering, enterprise platform architecture, or the practical work of bringing AI into engineering teams.

Contact information