

Practical AI in the places it actually pays back
Document extraction, classification, drafting, and support triage built into your existing workflows - with evaluation and human review, not a demo that fails in production.
If more than one of these sounds familiar, this is the right service to talk about.
A team reads the same kind of document hundreds of times a week
An AI pilot demonstrated well and never reached production
Support agents rewrite the same answer in slightly different words all day
Nobody can tell you how accurate your current AI feature actually is
Model spend is climbing and no one can attribute it to a workflow
AI pilots stall because they are evaluated on impressive demos instead of on your messiest real inputs. The result is a tool nobody in operations trusts enough to rely on.
We pick narrow, high-volume tasks with a clear right answer, benchmark against your historical data, and ship with a human review queue that shrinks as measured accuracy earns it.
Invoices, contracts, forms, and scanned PDFs turned into structured fields with per-field confidence and a review queue for anything below threshold.
Inbound email, tickets, and applications categorised and routed, with the ambiguous minority escalated to a person instead of guessed at.
Replies, summaries, and reports drafted for a human to approve, which keeps a person accountable while removing most of the typing.
Answers grounded in your documentation and records, returned with citations, so a wrong answer can be traced back to the source that caused it.
A labelled test set, accuracy tracked per release, token budgets per workflow, and alerting when either number moves the wrong way.
We rank candidate tasks by volume, tolerance for error, and how cleanly success can be measured. Some get rejected here - that is the point.
Before any build, we assemble a labelled set from your own history so accuracy claims are grounded in your data.
The workflow ships with review queues, confidence thresholds, cost controls, and full audit logging of every model call.
Accuracy is tracked over time, so model or prompt changes are a measured decision rather than a hopeful one.
Repetitive reading and drafting work handled automatically
Measured accuracy before anything reaches a customer
Human review kept exactly where judgement matters
We would rather say so early than take the work and disappoint you later.
Tasks with no agreed right answer to measure against
Regulated decisions that require a named human to make them
Training a model from scratch when a hosted model plus retrieval will do
Chat interfaces added because a competitor added one
Use-case assessment with expected accuracy and cost
Prototype evaluated against your real historical data
Production build with review queues and audit logging
Ongoing evaluation harness and monitoring
Engagement: Assessment first, then scoped build
Timeline: Assessment in 1 week, pilot in 4-6
Discuss This ServiceTo a written assessment with expected accuracy and cost
From assessment to a measured pilot in production
Logged with inputs, outputs, cost, and reviewer decision
In Practice
Line-level extraction matched against purchase orders, so only genuine exceptions reach the finance team.
Incoming claims classified by complexity and completeness, so straightforward cases move quickly and the rest reach a specialist with a summary attached.
Draft replies grounded in the knowledge base and reviewed by an agent, measured on first-response time rather than on how clever the demo looked.
Requirements extracted into a matrix and matched against previous answers, turning a week of reading into a day of editing.
Related Work
Financial services
A lending team read every application pack by hand. We built an extraction and classification workflow with a human review queue, benchmarked on two years of their own files.
Questions
Get In Touch
