Skip to content
AI Assistants / GA Applications

AI assistants / Documents

Turn incoming documents into reviewable structured information.

AI-assisted document intake can classify an incoming file and propose fields, summaries or next steps for a person to verify. GA Applications designs secure upload, document handling, extraction confidence, validation screens and workflow integration so uncertain values remain visible and no consequential record is silently changed from an unreviewed model output.

Bounded requestWhich extracted fields need a person to verify?
RequestRetrieveDraftReview
Draft with evidence

The assistant has prepared a response, but it is not an approved decision.

1Document schema / required evidenceapproved source
2Intake policy / confidence rulecheck currency
Pending review. No external action is available in this demonstration.
Approved sourcesVisible evidenceRole permissionsHuman reviewEvaluationDisable path

Useful because the job is bounded. Trustworthy because the boundaries are visible.

AI assistance belongs inside a designed operating process. It does not replace accountable people, authoritative records or competent professional judgement.

01 / SOURCES

Know what it may use

Approved collections, currency, ownership and access are designed before the interface.

02 / EVIDENCE

Let people inspect support

Citations, source context and uncertainty travel with the draft.

03 / AUTHORITY

Keep decisions attributable

Permissions, review, escalation, logging and shutdown routes match consequence.

01

Control how documents enter the system.

Upload, email intake or supported integrations need file limits, malware controls, source context, duplicate handling and a server-confirmed receipt.

CONTROL 1.1

Acceptance

Allow only justified formats and sizes with clear failure messages.

CONTROL 1.2

Identity

Connect sender, customer, job or case where reliably known.

02

Show each proposed value beside its document evidence.

Reviewers can compare extracted fields with the page or region that supports them, correct mistakes and mark information as absent.

CONTROL 2.1

Confidence

Use confidence as a review aid, not a truth score.

CONTROL 2.2

Correction

Capture the approved value without overwriting the original file.

03

Route verified information into the appropriate workflow.

Only approved fields create or update CRM, job, finance or document records; exceptions remain in a visible queue.

CONTROL 3.1

Validation gate

Require key identifiers and consequential values to be confirmed.

CONTROL 3.2

Destination

Record what was written, where and by whose approval.

04

Protect document contents and retention.

Files may contain personal, financial, health or commercial information, so provider use, access, storage, logs and deletion require explicit design.

CONTROL 4.1

Minimise

Send only necessary content to approved processing components.

CONTROL 4.2

Retention

Separate original-file, extracted-data and diagnostic-log lifecycles.

05

Evaluate with representative layouts and difficult cases.

Testing covers scans, handwriting where considered, missing pages, tables, conflicting values, poor images and adversarial content.

CONTROL 5.1

Ground truth

Use human-verified samples and field-level scoring.

CONTROL 5.2

Fallback

Route unsupported or low-confidence files to manual handling.

Questions worth answering

What teams ask before they commit.

Can AI read every document accurately?
No. Results vary by layout, scan quality, handwriting, language and field type. Human validation and a manual fallback remain part of the workflow.
Can it update our CRM automatically?
Verified low-risk fields may flow into a CRM under approved rules. Sensitive or consequential information should remain subject to explicit review.

Extract, then verify

Test one representative document journey.

We can map intake, proposed fields, reviewer decisions and the approved destination.