SourceFrameUSE CASE
Check AI Answers Against Web Sources
An AI answer is a good starting point, not a citation. SourceFrame turns a ChatGPT or Claude conversation into a source-backed brief and sets it against real web sources — so you can see which claims hold up and which still need checking.
The problem with trusting a chat answer
A confident answer is not the same as a checked one.
AI chats are useful for thinking out loud, but the evidence stays hidden inside the thread. You cannot tell which parts are grounded in real sources, which are model recall, and which are plausible-sounding filler.
SourceFrame keeps the AI conversation as context but stops treating it as proof. It pulls the chat in as a source, labels it as AI-generated, and then grounds the brief in web sources you can actually inspect.
How SourceFrame checks an AI answer
Capture the AI chat — bring a ChatGPT or Claude conversation in as a source with the browser extension.
Add web sources — pair the chat with relevant pages, or let SourceFrame discover sources from a prompt.
Generate a brief — SourceFrame separates claims that the web sources support from ones the sources do not cover.
Read the evidence gaps — the brief calls out what could not be verified, instead of smoothing it over.
What you get back
The result is a brief where the AI answer and the web evidence sit next to each other. Supported claims carry citations to the sources that back them. Unsupported or thinly-sourced claims are flagged as evidence gaps, so a confident sentence in a chat does not quietly become a fact in your work.
Supported claims
Points the web sources back up, each cited to the source it came from.
Evidence gaps
Claims the source set does not cover — surfaced, not hidden, so you know what to verify next.
A practical example
You ask ChatGPT which database to use for a new service and get a decisive-sounding recommendation. Instead of running with it, you capture the chat, add the vendors’ own docs and a couple of independent write-ups, and generate a brief.
The brief shows that the throughput claims check out against the docs, but the “cheaper at scale” assertion has no support in your sources — it becomes an evidence gap to confirm before you commit.
Keep going
AI Research Briefs
Turn a prompt, open tabs, or an AI chat into a cited, inspectable brief.
Compare Tools
Build a side-by-side Comparison Brief with criteria, tradeoffs, and evidence gaps.
Summarize Sources
Condense many tabs, articles, or docs into one cited Summary Brief.
Recommendation Brief Template
Context, recommendation, alternatives, risks, and evidence gaps in one place.
Check your next AI answer against real sources
Turn a ChatGPT or Claude conversation into a source-backed brief and see what actually holds up.