Internal Tool
ResearchLens
Most disagreements are two people answering different questions
An internal research pipeline. Give it a contested question and it retrieves a dozen or more papers across economics, sociology and political science, pulls each one apart into what it measured and on whom, then classifies every apparent conflict by type — including the common case where two studies look opposed but are measuring different things entirely.
The Challenge
The expensive mistake in research is not finding the wrong paper, it is comparing two right ones badly. Two studies get set against each other in public when one measured a rate and the other measured a count, or one looked at individuals and the other at neighbourhoods. Read quickly, they contradict. Read properly, they never met.
Our Solution
Every paper is broken down the same way before anything is compared: what was measured, on whom, under what conditions. Only then are pairs classified, and the level-of-analysis mismatch is checked first because it is the one that fools people most often. The output states each paper's measured quantity in plain terms, so a claim of contradiction has to survive being spelled out.
Results
- Twelve to twenty papers retrieved and decomposed per question
- Twelve-type conflict classification across every paper pairing
- Level-of-analysis mismatch checked before anything else
- Runs on a flat subscription — no per-query API billing
What it was built with
Want something like this for your business?
We start small. About two weeks, a firm price, and something real you can click and try before you commit to anything bigger.