Skip to Content
AnalysisReviewing a run

Reviewing a run

Watch it run while one is in flight, or Review the run afterwards, opens the run review screen: one version of the analysis, step by step.

The ladder

The left rail lists the nine steps in order, grouped into five phases — ingest, frame and retrieve, structure, score and decide, compose and commit. Each step shows what it is for:

StepIts job
Knowledge baseThe same party, spelled four ways, resolved
Case summaryState the matter neutrally
Research checklistThe questions this matter raises
Similar casesAnalogous decisions
Legal researchAuthority for the questions asked
Theory and damagesThe theory, the damages, the defences to expect
Case assessmentPrice the judgement already made
MemorandumThe prose an attorney reads first
DevelopmentsWhat changed, and what to do about it

Watching live

While a run is going the header shows Live, and a ticker across the top tracks elapsed time, steps finished, current case strength, and steps needing a look.

Each panel fills in the moment its step writes its row — you do not have to wait for the run to finish. Scroll away and the screen detaches from the live step rather than dragging you along; scroll back to follow again.

Required and skippable steps

Each step says which it is.

Required — if it fails, the run ends there.

Can be skipped — if it fails the run carries on without it, and the step records why. You will see the run carried on without it; nothing below was blocked.

Carried forward

A step marked carried forward from run 6 was reused: nothing it depends on had changed. That is what makes an incremental run cheap.

Not recorded

A step with Not recorded finished without writing a row — usually because the step did not exist when that run ran. It is shown anyway so the ladder reads the same on every run.

Inside the knowledge base step

The first step is worth opening on its own. It shows the resolved parties with their aliases (aka …), the fact and event counts, what is new since the last run, the chronology it built, and the evidence list every later stage cites into.

Stages cite an index into that list, never a quote they composed. The index resolves back to the fact, the document and the page — so the worst a model can do is cite the wrong one, which points at a real passage that visibly does not support the claim.

If the generative merge was unavailable, the step says so: parties were resolved by normalisation alone, and the knowledge base is usable and may be coarser than usual.

Audit history

Audit history on the Analysis tab records everything that happened to the analysis on this matter, including what the engine itself did — actor Analysis engine. Export CSV takes the lot.

Last updated on