SummerEyesFORMAL REASONING ENGINE // v1.0.0
WHEN SOURCES CONFLICT, KNOW WHAT TO BELIEVE.

Reasoning
You Can
Audit.

Your sources disagree. Your AI hallucinates confidence. SummerEyes is the reasoning engine that weighs every claim, scores every source, and shows you exactly why it believes what it believes. No black boxes. No vibes.

How It Works
[SOURCE SCORING] ACTIVE
Weigh Every Source

Every source gets a reliability score. An SEC filing carries more weight than an anonymous tweet. When a source has a conflict of interest, the engine discounts them automatically. You see only the signal.

[TIMELINE ANALYSIS] ACTIVE
Map the Timeline

Claims decay over time. Old rumors lose weight. The engine maps when every assertion was made and what period it covers, so stale narratives don't pollute your analysis.

[CONFLICT DETECTION] ACTIVE
Spot Contradictions

When analysts disagree, the engine doesn't pick a side. It shows you every coherent interpretation, who supports each one, and how confident you should be in each version of events.

BUILT FOR ANALYSTS. NOT MATHEMATICIANS.

Submit Your Question

Feed in claims from any source — earnings calls, news reports, analyst notes, insider tips. Tag each source with a reliability level. The engine handles the math.

Get a Scored Verdict

For every claim, you get a clear confidence score: how much evidence supports it, how much opposes it, and how much is still unknown. No hidden weights. Every number is traceable.

Act With Clarity

See which narratives hold up under scrutiny and which fall apart. The engine identifies every contradiction, ranks every source, and tells you exactly where the uncertainty lives.

Read More
WHO THIS IS FOR
Intelligence Analysts

Reconcile conflicting HUMINT, SIGINT, and OSINT reports into defensible assessments.

Financial Analysts

Score competing earnings narratives, M&A rumors, and guidance revisions by source quality.

Compliance Officers

Audit due diligence trails with explainable reasoning that regulators can follow.

Investigative Teams

Build cases from contradictory evidence with formal argumentation that holds up in review.