Evidence analysis

We built Continua because every "chat with PDF" tool we tried failed the same way: retrieval grabs a few chunks, answers confidently, and misses the qualifier on page 1,847. In high-stakes documents that's not an inconvenience — it's a lost case, a bad acquisition, a rejected claim. So we went the opposite direction: no RAG at all. Continua reads 100% of every page (up to 1B tokens in one task), returns a report where every claim cites its exact page, and — the part we're proudest of — flags where your documents contradict each other. Every finding is inspectable and tagged: cited, conflicted, duplicated, or unused. Where it shines today: medical chronologies, acquisition diligence, RFP compliance, insurance claim rebuttals. Where it's still rough: reports take minutes (we read everything — that's the cost), no API yet, English-optimized. We're in public beta and genuinely want hard feedback — bring your nastiest document pile and tell us where it breaks. I'll answer every comment here.

1 Reply Share Delete Report

Search

Featured matches

Other tools

Go to section

Search