Evidence comparison
Define the source boundary, required structure, and conditions for a useful draft.
Automations / Research operations
01Reusable workflow
Hear the customer signal.
Compare themes across interviews and feedback while keeping original evidence, minority signals, and reviewer notes visible.
02Workflow design
Automate. Review. Decide.
Theme review
Keep evidence, conflict, gaps, and uncertainty visible at the point of review.
No invented quotes
Name the human decision required before the output can move forward.
Evidence review / 04Source quality before model choice.
04Inspectable by design
Trace every claim.
Fieldnote keeps the original record, relevant passage, conflicts, assumptions, and reviewer decision close to the generated language.
- 01
- See supportOpen the source behind a claim without leaving the review.
- 02
- See limitsSeparate missing evidence from model uncertainty.
- 03
- See ownershipKnow who must approve, edit, or escalate the result.
03Continue exploring
Related
automations.
Brief the next decision.
Turn approved source collections into a structured draft with claim-level citations, assumptions, open questions, and review ownership.
View workflowFollow what changes.
Collect approved updates, identify material change, and prepare a recurring brief for human review and distribution.
View workflow