The use of analytical software developed by American company Palantir in military command systems could lead commanders to mistake an algorithm-generated interpretation of events for objective reality. This warning appears in an expert article published in the Russian military yearbook Russia Military Yearbook 2027, reviewed by RIA Novosti.

The authors identified several serious risks associated with integrating such technologies into military decision-making.

One of the main concerns is epistemic dependence. As military command structures become increasingly integrated with digital analytical platforms, commanders grow more reliant on the systems' methods of processing and presenting information.

This creates a risk that military personnel will stop treating algorithmic conclusions as interpretations of incoming data and instead regard them as direct representations of reality.

At the same time, the experts acknowledge Palantir’s technological advantages. The platform can integrate separate datasets, analyze large volumes of information and update data rapidly, creating a unified information environment for military command and control.

However, processing large amounts of data does not guarantee accurate conclusions. The experts warn about false correlations, in which a system identifies statistically significant relationships that do not reflect actual political or operational conditions. Such errors can have particularly serious consequences during combat operations.

Another limitation identified in the article is the lack of transparency in the platform’s internal processes, commonly known as the black-box problem.

Even when developers claim their systems are transparent, questions remain about how well military commanders, headquarters staff and government institutions understand the principles used by algorithms to select, filter and prioritize information.

Finally, the authors highlighted the political and legal implications of transferring critical analytical functions to a private company.

In their assessment, military command’s dependence on an external commercial developer raises questions about the acceptable limits of delegating responsibility for analyzing information used to make military decisions.