CASE STUDY
An AI-assisted verification workflow that turns complex document review into structured, traceable findings — while keeping evidence and reviewer judgment close to every decision.
Project Context
Document-heavy review gets slow when requirements, sources, findings, and decisions live apart. This feature brings them into one path from checklist and document to findings users can inspect and act on.
The UX Challenge
My Role
I designed the end-to-end verification experience: hierarchy, traceability, review states, and the relationship between AI assistance and human judgment.
Interaction Model / Core Flow
The workflow moves from review setup through verification to a human decision—keeping requirements, findings, and evidence connected.
Along the way, reviewers can inspect evidence, challenge a finding, ask follow-ups, and prepare report content before confirming an outcome.
Key UX Decisions
Present verification results as inspectable findings rather than long AI-generated answers.
Keep the requirement, source location, evidence, and finding connected so users can verify results quickly.
Show meaningful review stages without exposing unnecessary internal AI reasoning.
Actions and follow-up questions retain the active finding, requirement, source, and evidence.
AI can explain, compare, suggest, and prepare content, but the reviewer remains responsible for important conclusions.
Design System / Interface Logic
Findings, requirements, source evidence, and reviewer actions share one interaction structure so each issue remains inspectable and challengeable.
The interface separates what the system found from the evidence behind it and the decision the reviewer still needs to make.
Final Design
Review setup, findings, evidence, AI assistance, and reporting sit in one verification path: finding → requirement → evidence → reviewer decision.
The interface does not ask people to trust a generated conclusion on its own. Each finding links back to its requirement and source evidence, then forward to the next action.
AI helps organize and investigate the evidence. The reviewer remains responsible for the decision.
Design Outcome
The review pattern can be reused across different document types because the finding, supporting evidence, and reviewer decision always stay connected.
I like talking through design decisions. If you would have approached something differently, I’d like to hear it.