- Who runs it
- Maritime and Coastguard Agency
- Can it affect people?
- Possibly. It may shape what people see, are recommended, flagged, or prioritised for.
- Possible rights impact: Indirect public effect
How much do we know?
A source is a published page or document behind a claim. The label measures what is documented, not whether a system is good or safe. Missing information does not prove that a safeguard is missing.
Sources and further reading
- Maritime and Coastguard Agency: Themis / GOV.UK Algorithmic Transparency Records / 2025-10-30
- GOV.UK Algorithmic Transparency Records - official inventory / GOV.UK Algorithmic Transparency Records
optional detailFull record and details
The interface and explanatory guides are translated. Record names, record descriptions, quotations, detailed editorial notes, and linked public documents stay in their published language so evidence is not silently changed.
If this affects someone
Themis is primarily employed in maritime and aeronautical Search and rescue (SAR) operations when there is a need to predict the drift of objects or people at sea to locate them efficiently. It is used in scenarios like: Distress Signals: When a vessel, aircraft, or person has gone missing, and their last known position needs to be analysed.
There are circumstances whereby the data set may not be as reliable as other areas, for example under a bridge or within a harbour whereby variables can skew the data set. Operators are allowed to use local judgement on search parameters but it has to be justified and documented.
The data set is provided to us by the Met Office. We would be unable to define what data is capture to create these data sets
Sources and further reading
First indexed from GOV.UK Algorithmic Transparency Records on 2026-09-01. Only usable fields from the public record are shown; missing answers remain blank.
Fields were mapped from the linked public record by deterministic code. No generative model wrote this text.
Facts to check
- Who runs it
- Maritime and Coastguard Agency
- Life area
- Public sector
- Proof level
- Source-backed
- Footnotes
- 2
- updated
- 12 months ago
The score orders work, not people.
Review priority rises for rights-sensitive uses, missing sources, unanswered accountability fields, and old evidence. Strong official documentation lowers it. The score is not a verdict on safety, fairness, or legality.
A missing field means the attached public sources did not answer it. Coverage is uneven, publication does not prove performance, and a certificate has a defined boundary.
Previous versions
- Imported2 months agoSubstantialImported from GOV.UK Algorithmic Transparency Records.
Help check this record.
Add a public source, challenge a claim, or point out a missing way to reach a person.
A submitted name, email, description, source, or correction is used only to verify the record and prevent abuse. It is not published automatically.