Evidenced answers

The same model. With a source instead of a guess.

General AI guesses – and can’t say where a statement comes from. c:node gives the same model your documents and the c:node Graph. Every statement is checked at its source before you see it.

Try it live · free Compare costs

Without c:node

On its own, the model answers generically – without a source.

A model on its own only knows its training data: no contracts, no current law, no registers. It answers generically – and sounds confident doing so.

With c:node

With c:node, you get findings on your case.

Now the same model reads your contracts and applicable law. The answer names which contracts are affected, why, and with which citation.

Verified

c:node checks every statement at its source.

Before you see the answer, c:node breaks it down into individual statements. Each one is checked against its source. Anything not evidenced is marked as open.

Honest

If the evidence is missing, c:node would rather say “I don’t know”.

Instead of inventing a plausible number, c:node says the evidence is missing – and which document would provide it.

Cheaper

Less context makes every answer cheaper.

c:node gives the model only the relevant evidence instead of entire folders. That makes an evidenced answer up to 24× cheaper.

@Viktor, which of our contracts do we need to adapt because of the EU Data Act?

You need to adapt 4 of 23 cloud, maintenance and data contracts. Most urgent:

Cloud contract “Hosting Nord” blocks switching provider for 24 months
Maintenance contract: machine data belongs to the manufacturer only
Two software service providers without a data processing agreement

Framework agreement Hosting Nord § 14EU Data Act Art. 25Maintenance contract § 7GDPR Art. 28

How certain is that?

I broke the answer down into individual statements and checked each one against its source:

Verification · 3 of 4 evidenced

§ 14 excludes switching for 24 monthsevidenced

Data Act: switching with at most 2 months' noticeevidenced

Only the manufacturer analyses machine dataevidenced

The provider will agreeopen

How high was the contractual penalty in the 2021 dispute with Hosting Nord?

I find no evidence for that – neither in your contracts nor in the correspondence I have access to.

What is missing

The file on the 2021 litigation is not connected. If it is in the DMS, your IT can grant access to the folder.

What did this answer cost?

Calculated with Claude Sonnet 5.5, list prices as of 29 Sep 2026:

Cost per answer

Model alone, 23 contracts pasted in, 4 rounds€0.574

With c:node, targeted evidence, 1 call€0.0236

Cheaper per evidenced answerup to 24×

How we calculated →

Model alone· without c:node, training data only

Which of our contracts do we need to adapt because of the EU Data Act?

The EU Data Act mainly affects contracts on connected products, cloud services and data sharing. I recommend checking your contracts for the following points:

Rules on data access
Switching clauses with cloud providers
Fair contract terms

Without your contracts, I can't say which ones are specifically affected. Please consult legal counsel.

No source · no reference to your contracts