Research
A researcher who has read four hundred papers and can no longer remember which one had the result that contradicts today's idea.
[ 01 ]The problem
A literature base outgrows memory around paper fifty. Notes help until they don't — search finds keywords, not claims, and the contradiction you needed surfaces three weeks after the experiment was designed. Synthesis is the bottleneck, and it doesn't parallelize across grad students cleanly.
[ 02 ]How Mynd handles it
The corpus becomes a claim graph
Y0 ingests the library and connects claims, methods, and results across papers — so 'what contradicts this assumption' is a query, not an archaeology dig.
Reviews are planned sweeps
A research question becomes a planned sweep over the graph: gather supporting results, gather contradicting ones, note method differences that explain the gap.
Synthesis with page-level citations
The output cites paper, section, and table. Every claim in the draft survey can be checked in one click — by you, or by reviewer two.
[ 03 ][ example run ]
plan ✦ sweep: does result hold under low-data regimes context ✓ corpus — 412 papers indexed context ✓ claim graph — 9 directly relevant execute → gather: 5 supporting · 3 contradicting execute → method-difference analysis drafted result ✓ synthesis with page-level citations · 1 afternoon, was 3 weeks
[ 04 ]faster literature synthesis