Four independent AI models stress-test
your research before you publish.
"Can't I just use ChatGPT or Claude?"
You can. Here's what you lose.
One model asked to "give four perspectives" is one brain roleplaying. Four independent models have genuinely different training data, different biases, and different blind spots. You can't fake independence.
Push back on any LLM and it caves. Ask it to steelman your thesis and it agrees with itself. Our models don't see each other's output until the cross-examination phase. There is no social pressure to converge.
When 4 independent models flag the same risk, that signal means something. When one model lists 5 risks, you have no idea which ones matter. Agreement scores and dissent mapping tell you where conviction is real and where your blind spot lives.
Your missing second opinion
Large teams have IC meetings, devil's advocates, and junior analysts poking holes. You have… you. Conclavik gives you a structured challenge function without hiring a team.
Actual output
Palantir (PLTR): Pre-Publication Research Review
A draft equity research note uploaded for adversarial review. Four models flag publishable-quality errors in AIP commercial metrics and valuation assumptions before the note goes out.
European Defence Stocks
Should an equity fund overweight defence given NATO 2% GDP commitments?
NVIDIA Bear Thesis Stress Test
Is NVDA really "priced for perfection" at 17x forward P/E? Four models dismantle the bear case, stress-test margin sustainability, and flag the real risks consensus is missing.
Pharma M&A: Red-Team the Deal
$30B oncology biotech acquisition by Big Pharma facing patent cliffs. Bull/bear, antitrust risk, break-price downside.
Actual output. Unedited. Judge the quality yourself.