Jev versus citation services
Citation services (search APIs, academic indexes, browser agents) find or format references. Jev judges a pair (claim, source span) with a typed question. It will not invent a DOI.
Unofficial comparison. Official method: citation check cookbook — one Choice on whether the quote’s context supports the claim; confidence flags human review. We do not restate their accuracy figures. Not affiliated; no keys.
Cite vs generate boundary
| Step | Owner |
|---|---|
| Propose a quote / URL | Retriever, user, or LLM |
| Normalize the span | Your parser |
| “Does this source support this claim?” | Jev Choice or Noul |
| Write the footnote string | Template / LLM |
| Show it to the user | Only if code says support ≥ τ and confidence ≥ floor |
If you skip the judge, you have a generator with decorations. If you skip the generator, you have a support label — often enough for RAG filters.
Failure modes
- Claim and source not both in
state— the model cannot fetch the web. - Dates and numbers in the claim — extract in code; Jev is weak at numeric identity (jaggedness).
- Low-confidence “supports” presented as verified — treat as handoff-shaped review.
- Schema-safe Choice ≠ the source is true in the world.
FAQ
Can Jev browse? Not by itself. Feed text.
Is this plagiarism detection? No. It is support / not-support / review on spans you already have.
Hub: Comparisons. Sibling: passage classification. Official: docs.typesafe.ai.
Sources
Public TypeSafe or adjacent documentation only. No private claims.