Compliance analysis workspace

# From retrieved regulation to conclusion-ready action.

This screen is built for a reviewer comparing one paragraph of product documentation against candidate regulations, system reasoning, and recommended changes. The rhythm is left-to-right: evidence retrieval, close reading, and decision output.

Open parse detail Ask follow-up in chat

## Retrieved regulations

Top 10 by dense similarity
GB 26112-2010 §4.2 Roof crush resistance
Primary match · mandatory requirement · promoted as lead citation
Vehicle safety High impact
C-NCAP rulebook §3.1 occupant safety context
Supporting match · interpretation context · not mandatory on its own
Assessment Context only
Internal design note: structure validation test plan
Evidence match · useful support artifact with no direct legal force
Evidence Supporting

## Document paragraph under review

Chunk 148 · supplier safety narrative

Source text

The roof support structure is designed to satisfy national crush-resistance requirements, and the module enclosure preserves occupant safety under static load conditions. Validation results are available in the body engineering report and are considered aligned with the current certification baseline.

Analysis focus

The system flags that the narrative claims compliance but omits the explicit load threshold. The phrase satisfy national crush-resistance requirements should be tied to a stated requirement derived from GB 26112-2010 §4.2 to avoid unsupported compliance language.

## Analysis stages

Streaming reasoning workflow
1. Clause retrieval
Dense retrieval found 10 nearby standards; 3 were promoted after category scoring.
2. Requirement extraction
Relevant mandatory threshold identified and isolated for reviewer verification.
3. Gap analysis
Document contains claim language but no direct numeric evidence or linked report identifier.
4. Recommendation synthesis
Drafting precise remediation text for reviewer approval.

## Findings and conclusion

Reviewer-ready output
Unsupported compliance statement

The paragraph asserts conformity without quoting the actual threshold or citing a specific verification artifact.

Needs revision
Evidence linkage incomplete

Body engineering report exists, but the report ID and page range are missing from the narrative used in the dossier.

Evidence gap
Recommended replacement text

"The roof support structure was validated in accordance with GB 26112-2010 §4.2; see the linked body engineering report for the supporting test result and formal threshold statement."

Next action

Assign to Body Structure team for wording update, then rerun the same paragraph through clause verification.

Escalation

If report ID cannot be linked within 24 hours, downgrade dossier status and notify homologation lead.