A Harvard PhD 3-day work VS. Openrevise 30 min's work

A physician friend moved from surgery to medical affairs and had to prepare an industry Q&A page.
He spent two days on it. A general LLM “finished” in 30 minutes, but introduced untraceable claims.

That failure became Revise.

Revise is a revision infrastructure for high-stakes documents:

  • Evidence Gate before revision (fail-closed if required sources are missing)
  • MECE decomposition by claim/sub-question
  • Native .docx tracked changes (w:del / w:ins)
  • Fixed audit artifacts for review and archiving

Goal:

  • Do not guess
  • Evidence first, revision second
  • If evidence is missing, return: not available in currently verifiable fulltext

Core workflow

  1. Scope + patch spec (anchor/replacement/reason/source refs)
  2. Source gate check (required_sources, must_include_tokens)
  3. Run governance (run_id, manifests, index)
  4. DOCX revision engine (hard-fail on unsupported edits)
  5. Audit export (source_gate_report, revision_change_audit, q_source_map)

Github

If this is useful, please :star: the repo and share one edge case I should test.

Heading

1 Like