Research Synthesizer

What This Does

Turns a pile of disparate documents into a structured synthesis with scored themes, mapped contradictions, and identified gaps. You feed in reports, transcripts, articles, or any research material, and Claude produces a layered analysis: what the sources agree on, where they clash, what they miss entirely, and what you can confidently claim based on the evidence. The final output is an executive summary backed by traceable, confidence-rated insights.

This is not just summarization. It is cross-source reasoning — the kind of work that takes a research analyst days of sticky notes and spreadsheets.

The Problem

You have 10, 20, or 50 sources on a topic. Reading them individually gives you pieces, but you need the full picture: which findings hold up across sources, which contradict each other, and which questions nobody has answered yet. Manual synthesis is slow, error-prone, and hard to make systematic. Most people end up with a summary that parrots the loudest source instead of weighing evidence.

The Fix

This playbook creates a structured synthesis pipeline. Each source gets a credibility assessment and evidence extraction. Findings are cross-referenced to build themes with evidence strength scores. Contradictions are explicitly mapped with the reasoning behind each side. Gap analysis reveals what the sources collectively fail to address. Every insight carries a confidence level so you know what to trust.

Quick Start

1. Create your project folder and subdirectories:

mkdir -p ~/research-synthesis/{sources,extractions,analysis,output}
cd ~/research-synthesis

2. Drop your source documents (PDFs, text files, transcripts, notes) into sources/.

3. Download the CLAUDE.md template below and save it to ~/research-synthesis/CLAUDE.md.

4. Launch Claude Code in the project folder:

cd ~/research-synthesis
claude

5. Start with source ingestion:

/ingest — Process all documents in sources/ and create extraction files

6. Once extractions are complete, run the synthesis:

/synthesize — Cross-reference all extractions and build the synthesis report

Example Commands

"I have 15 interview transcripts and 8 industry reports on remote work productivity. Ingest all of them."

"/ingest — Process the 23 documents in sources/ and create structured extractions for each one."

"/themes — What patterns emerge across all sources? Score each theme by evidence strength."

"/contradictions — Where do the interview transcripts disagree with the industry reports? Which side has better evidence?"

"/gaps — What are the sources collectively silent about? Where should I look next?"

"/insights — Give me confidence-rated takeaways I can use in my final report."

"/synthesize — Run the full pipeline and produce the executive summary with citations."

"/credibility — Show me a ranked table of all sources by credibility score."

"/search employee satisfaction — Find every mention of employee satisfaction across all sources."

Tips

• Credibility weighting changes everything. A synthesis that treats a blog post the same as a peer-reviewed study will mislead you. The credibility scoring forces honest assessment of each source.
• Start with /ingest, then iterate. Do not try to synthesize before all sources are properly extracted. The extraction phase is where the quality of the final output is determined.
• Gap analysis is your secret weapon. Reviewers and decision-makers are most impressed when you can say what the evidence does NOT cover. It shows intellectual honesty and flags risk.
• Contradictions need explanation, not resolution. Sometimes both sides are right in different contexts. Document the why behind the disagreement rather than picking a winner.
• Add sources incrementally. If you find new material during the synthesis, add it with /ingest and re-run /synthesize to update the analysis.
• Use /search liberally. When writing your final report, use /search to find supporting evidence for specific claims across all sources at once.

Troubleshooting

Problem: Extraction quality is uneven across document types

Solution: Transcripts and reports have very different structures. If extractions from transcripts are thin, add explicit instructions: "Extract claims from this interview transcript. Treat direct quotes from the interviewee as primary evidence. Note the speaker role and context."

Problem: Too many themes identified, making the synthesis unwieldy

Solution: After running /themes, ask Claude to merge related themes and keep only those with Moderate or Strong evidence. You can also set a theme limit: "Identify the top 8 themes by evidence strength."

Problem: Contradictions section is empty even though sources disagree

Solution: Contradictions are only flagged when the same specific topic is addressed differently. If sources cover different subtopics, there may be no direct contradictions. Try: "/contradictions — Look for implicit disagreements where sources make assumptions that conflict with other sources' findings."

Problem: The executive summary is too long or reads like a list

Solution: Specify constraints: "Write the executive summary in 500 words as a narrative. Lead with the three highest-confidence insights, then note key contradictions and gaps. No bullet points."