The working A prototype: use its controls to test the build question.
Convert invented conversation records into bounded, reviewable unmet-need hypotheses—not verified needs, demand, trends or priorities.
RN conceived the question, structured the evidence boundaries, designed the experience, implemented the prototype and documented its limits.
This independent prototype demonstrates an approach; it is not a deployed client system, professional advice or proof of real-world outcomes.
Work through the controls with a situation of your own rather than the sample values. The tool responds to what you put in, so the useful output comes from real input, and everything is processed in your browser as you go. Any sample content you find already loaded is there to show the shape of a filled-in state, and you can clear it and start again at any point.
The build overview sets out the question, the purpose, the role and the evidence status in one place, and the public record behind it states what changed, what another person can reuse and what supports the system. If you want to judge how far this build should be trusted, the record is the page to read, not this one.
SOCIAL LISTENING → UNMET NEED ENGINE · SYNTHETIC DEMONSTRATION
What are people repeatedly
struggling with?
Convert a fixed synthetic conversation corpus into bounded problem signals, affected groups, existing alternatives, and product or policy hypotheses—without mistaking repetition for verified demand. No real people are represented.
CORPUS-CEDAR NEED HYPOTHESIS
CORROBORATED-IN-SYNTHETIC-FIXTURE · HYPOTHESIS-NOT-VALIDATED. Repetition remains a signal, never proof of demand, prevalence, priority, or trend.
How can a person compare changing appointment windows without checking several pages?
Affected context: FICTIONAL PEOPLE TRYING TO COORDINATE A TIME-SENSITIVE APPOINTMENT
Fixed post records
- POST-CE-1
I checked three pages and still cannot tell which window is current. - POST-CE-2
The calendar and notice show different times. - POST-CE-3
I keep repeating the same comparison each morning. - POST-CE-4
A saved update date would help me know what changed. - POST-CE-5
I found a phone line, but it repeats one page. - POST-CE-6
Has anyone found one place that shows the current window?
What was mentioned
- Multiple fixture pages
Dates differ across the invented pages · FIXTURE-MENTION-ONLY - Fictional phone line
Does not resolve the synthetic discrepancy · FIXTURE-MENTION-ONLY
Signals that resist the pattern
- One post says a single page was sufficient for that fictional context.
Not recommendations
- PRODUCT-HYPOTHESIS · Source-dated comparison view
Only if real users, source authority, accessibility, maintenance, and correction needs are validated
HUMAN-VALIDATION-REQUIRED - POLICY-HYPOTHESIS · Common update-label practice
Only if responsible organizations and affected people validate the problem and authority
HUMAN-VALIDATION-REQUIRED
- REAL FREQUENCY
- REAL CONSEQUENCE
- SOURCE OWNERSHIP
- UPDATE AUTHORITY
- USER RESEARCH
- CLASSIFY REPEATED DECISION
FIXTURE-COMPLETE · SIX FIXED SYNTHETIC POSTS - BOUND AFFECTED CONTEXT
FIXTURE-COMPLETE · FICTIONAL PEOPLE TRYING TO COORDINATE A TIME-SENSITIVE APPOINTMENT - INVENTORY MENTIONED ALTERNATIVES
FIXTURE-COMPLETE · 2 FIXED ALTERNATIVES - SEEK CONTRADICTION
FIXTURE-COMPLETE · 1 FIXED CONTRADICTION RECORD - VALIDATE REAL NEED, CONSEQUENCE, DEMAND, AND ALTERNATIVES
HUMAN-RESEARCH-REQUIRED · REAL FREQUENCY / REAL CONSEQUENCE / SOURCE OWNERSHIP / UPDATE AUTHORITY / USER RESEARCH - DECIDE PRODUCT OR POLICY RESPONSE
HUMAN-RESEARCH-REQUIRED · NO DECISION AUTHORIZED
- VALIDATED EXACT FROZEN FIXTURE
- PRESERVED POST TEXT, DATE, CONTEXT, ALTERNATIVES, CONTRADICTIONS, MISSING EVIDENCE, AND CANDIDATE CONDITIONS
- PRESERVED HYPOTHESIS AND HUMAN-VALIDATION STATES
- NO SCRAPING, IDENTITY LINKAGE, PROFILING, SENTIMENT, DEMOGRAPHIC, PROTECTED-TRAIT, SCORE, RANK, OR REAL-WORLD INFERENCE
Boundary: Synthetic hypothesis only. No scraping, identity, demographic, protected-trait or sentiment inference, numeric score, rank, real-world need validation, priority, or recommendation.