How a review is drafted.

Six stages. Every claim traceable; every draft reproducible.

1. § I
   Ingest.

   BibTeX, RIS, a folder of PDFs, or a pasted list of DOIs. Each paper is read to its abstract; full-text is parsed when available. Duplicates are collapsed by DOI.

2. § II
   Parse.

   Author, year, venue, citations in and out, section structure. Nothing inferred; unreadable fields surface as gaps for human review.

3. § III
   Cluster.

   Hierarchical clustering on abstract-level embeddings. Themes emerge bottom-up. Four themes per twelve papers is typical; the silhouette score is shown alongside.

4. § IV
   Synthesize.

   A draft paragraph per theme. Every sentence carries an inline {{citeKey}} marker. No sentence ships without at least one marker; hallucinated citations do not appear.

5. § V
   Gap.

   Under-cited intersections between themes surface as gap candidates. These are potential research directions, not conclusions — they are flagged, not asserted.

6. § VI
   Sign.

   The review is signed with a pipeline version and a corpus hash. Rerun the same corpus against a new pipeline; see what changed.