Our summary
A credit review brings together loan agreements, financial statements and other records. A sentence in a review can sound right while relying on an old or incomplete document. Continua describes checking whether a specific passage supports the claim, contradicts it or leaves the question unanswered.
First, ordinary code checks that a quoted passage really appears in the document. Then Jev's Choice question selects from three meanings: support, contradiction or missing evidence. The workflow must first establish which agreement and amendments apply. Code handles arithmetic and dates; people review material financial conclusions.
A missing debt schedule does not prove that a borrower has no other debt. Nor does a confident answer establish that the complete file was checked. Continua reports that its internal Jev checks cost 1.34% of GPT checks, but provides too little test-set detail to establish wider reliability.
Key takeaways
- Check that the quote exists before asking a model what it means. An exact match can still reject a reworded quote or noisy scanned text.
- Keep missing evidence separate from a contradiction, and resolve document amendments before selecting the passage to check.
- Use code for calculations and dates, and keep important lending conclusions with people regardless of the model's confidence.