Why retrieval alone is not enough
Most retrieval-augmented generation systems treat search as a one-shot step: embed a query, fetch top-k documents, and pass them to a language model. This works well for factoid questions but falls apart when the goal is evidence synthesis — comparing findings across studies, weighing study quality, and producing outputs that a domain expert can actually review.
At mineris, we are building infrastructure that treats retrieval as the beginning of a structured workflow, not the end.
From search to synthesis
Our pipeline separates three concerns:
- Retrieval — High-recall search over PubMed and curated corpora using dense and sparse signals.
- Ranking and grounding — Re-ranking results by relevance and linking claims to specific passages in source material.
- Synthesis — Aggregating evidence into structured outputs that surface agreement, conflict, and gaps across the literature.
Each stage feeds the next, and each produces artifacts that a researcher can inspect independently.
Grounding matters
A synthesis system that cannot point to its sources is not useful for research decisions. Every claim in a mineris output links back to the passage it was derived from, making it possible to verify, challenge, or extend the result.
What comes next
We are actively working on better ranking models for biomedical literature, tighter integration between retrieval and structured review workflows, and calmer product surfaces that help researchers focus on the evidence rather than the tooling.
If you are working on similar problems, we would like to hear from you — reach out at admin@mineris.org.