How does multi-model consensus work?

Four frontier AI models analyze each question independently, then engage in structured adversarial debate — challenging each other's reasoning through multiple rounds. A synthesis engine distills their arguments into a single structured verdict with confidence scores and dissent tracking.

Which AI models does Conclavik use?

Four frontier AI models analyze each question independently — selected by benchmark performance, not brand.

How long does an analysis take?

5-15 minutes depending on complexity.

Yes. AES-256 encryption at rest, TLS in transit, EU-hosted, GDPR compliant. Ephemeral mode available.

Conclavik

Under the hood

Full transparency on how your analysis is produced — from model selection to final verdict.

Step 01

Four Independent AI Perspectives

Every analysis uses the top-ranked model from each of four independent AI providers — all with extended thinking enabled at maximum capacity. Each model brings distinct training data, reasoning patterns, and blind spots, ensuring genuine diversity of thought rather than echoes of the same source.

Deep Reasoning

Models selected for nuanced analysis and careful chain-of-thought logic

Broad Knowledge

Models with the widest training data for comprehensive coverage

Scientific Rigor

Models that excel at data-driven analysis and factual precision

Contrarian Thinking

Models that challenge assumptions and surface unconventional perspectives

Step 02

Benchmark-Driven Selection

Every model is scored against three independent benchmarks, ensuring selection is based on measured capability — not marketing.

GPQA Diamond

Graduate-level reasoning — tests deep analytical thinking across science, law, and economics

Arena.ai

Human preference ranking — how real users rate model quality in blind comparisons

GDPval-AA

Knowledge work performance — measures practical accuracy in business, finance, and professional contexts

Step 03

Intelligent Process Selection

Before your analysis begins, our top-ranked AI examines your question and automatically selects the optimal debate methodology. Different questions demand different approaches — a binary acquisition decision needs adversarial stress-testing, while a market forecast benefits from iterative consensus-building.

Deep Adversarial

Double roundtable, Socratic cross-examination, steelman defense, and final objections. Maximum scrutiny for high-stakes decisions.

e.g. "Should we acquire Company X at 8× EBITDA?"

Iterative Convergence

Models deliberate in successive rounds until they reach genuine agreement. Surfaces the strongest shared conclusions rather than artificial debate.

e.g. "What is the consensus outlook for European defense stocks?"

Structured Debate

Roundtable, Socratic questioning, steelman defense, and objections. Balanced adversarial analysis for complex multi-faceted questions.

e.g. "How does the EU AI Act affect our product roadmap?"

Step 04

Structured Adversarial Debate

Models don't just answer independently — they challenge, defend, and refine each other's reasoning through multiple rounds. The process is designed to surface blind spots and stress-test conclusions before they reach you.

Independent Analysis

Each model analyzes your question separately — no groupthink, no anchoring bias.

Cross-Examination

Models read and challenge each other's positions — exposing weaknesses, contradictions, and gaps.

Steelman & Devil's Advocate

Every argument gets its strongest possible formulation — then faces its strongest possible objection.

Consensus Synthesis

Surviving arguments are synthesized into a final verdict — with confidence levels, caveats, and actionable recommendations.

See how teams use it

Hedge Funds Legal M&A

Your data is protected by enterprise-grade security.

Learn about our security practices →

See how multi-model consensus reduces AI hallucinations →

See it in action

Join our private beta and see how structured AI debate transforms your decision-making.

Apply for Private Beta