Procedures, protocols, technical files and quality documentation: queryable, versioned and sourced, on infrastructure you control. Traceability is not an option added on top, it is the starting constraint.
On a regulated corpus, security and traceability questions come before performance questions.
A solution that assumes sending documents to an external service is ruled out immediately, whatever its performance. Sovereign deployment is not a sales argument, it is a prerequisite.
Answering from an expired procedure is not an imprecision, it is a deviation. The system must know which version applies and since when, or it must not answer.
An answer without a source is not usable in an environment where every decision must be reconstructible during an audit.
The same components as on an ordinary corpus, with stricter deployment and traceability constraints.
On your infrastructure or private cloud, including fully offline, with self-hosted models where required.
Every document carries its version and effective date. The system knows what applies today and what applied at a past date.
Document, version, page and paragraph cited systematically, so the answer can be reconstructed in an audit.
Who asked what, on which sources, with what result — readable by a non-technical person.
Rights by department, site and role, inherited from your directory rather than managed separately.
The cases where the system must say “I don't know” are defined with you. On a regulated corpus, that is the most important rule.
Quality documentation runs to thousands of versioned procedures. Finding the version applicable at a given date requires a manual search.
Document layer deployed internally, strict version and effective-date handling, sourced answers and a full audit log.
“Which procedure applied on 12 March” is answered with the document and its version, in seconds.
Internal protocols are scattered across several departments. Teams sometimes apply a version that is no longer current.
Internal knowledge base isolated by department, with the version in force surfaced and obsolete documents flagged.
Teams reach the applicable version, and version gaps become visible instead of propagating.
Technical files and regulatory documentation have accumulated across several product generations.
Document layer with a graph linking products, versions and regulatory requirements, plus structured extraction for dossiers.
Assembling a dossier draws on a queryable estate instead of a file-by-file search.
These products are already built. Some are available online, the others are shown on request.
The search engine that understands your documents and cites its sources.
Retrieval-augmented search coupled with a knowledge graph, tuned per theme: legal, corporate documentation, timelines. Every answer is traceable down to the original paragraph.
Try it onlineBuild your own AI agents without writing a line of code.
Tools, long-term memory, connectors, guardrails and supervision in a single interface. Your teams design an agent in the morning and ship it to production in the afternoon, on your data.
Try it onlineYes, if you want it to: deployment on your infrastructure or private cloud, including fully offline, with self-hosted models. That is the standard case on these corpora.
Version and effective date are captured at ingestion and become a search constraint. The system answers on the applicable version, and flags when a document is obsolete.
No. We provide the technical components, the traceability and the documentation. Validation within your quality framework is yours and your auditors'.
No. We stay on documentation, procedures, technical files and internal processes.
It says so. Refusal cases are defined with you, and on a regulated corpus that is the most important part of the configuration.
Yes. The log records who asked what, on which sources, with what result, in a form readable by a non-technical person.
We provide technical components and documentation, not a regulatory qualification. Validating our systems within your quality framework is yours and your auditors' responsibility, and we work with them rather than in their place. We do not work on uses touching diagnosis or clinical decision-making: it is not our domain, and it is not ground to improvise on.
If the answer is no, that is exactly where the conversation starts. Sovereign deployment is our standard case on these corpora.