Demo
A guided walkthrough.
Quarare turns a corpus of evidence into a defensible expert report through four stages. This page walks through what an analyst sees at each one, using a representative engagement: unauthorized disbursements at a mid-cap manufacturer, Q3 2024.
Illustrative. Actual interface and content may vary. For a live demo against your engagement context, request access.
On this page
01
Ingest
Documents in, reliability scored.
The engagement begins with a batch of 1,247 documents from the client: scanned ledgers, email backups, signed approval policies, bank statements, and a vendor master file. The analyst uploads the batch.
Quarare scores each document at ingestion. The inventory shows reliability at a glance.
Approval Policy v3.2 (signed, 2024-01-15).pdf
Primary source. Authenticated signature. Complete.
Bank statements, Citi Business 4471 (Jan-Dec 2024).pdf
Primary source. Bank-issued. Contemporaneous.
ERP exports - AP disbursements Q3 2024.csv
Primary source. Server-extracted. Hash verified.
Email backup, AP Manager (Outlook .pst).pst
Reconstructed from partial backup. Hash unverified for 14 messages.
Vendor invoices (scanned, mixed quality, 412 docs).pdf
Secondary source. OCR confidence variable. No countersignature for 38 entries.
Handwritten ledger excerpts (3 pages).jpg
Secondary source. No custody chain. Initialed only.
Two findings emerge before any analysis begins. The bank statements and ERP exports will carry the case. The handwritten ledger excerpts are usable but will need careful weighting in the final Finding. The vendor-invoice batch with missing countersignatures is the foundation challenge to flag early.
In the live product, each row expands to show the six-factor breakdown (provenance, authentication, chain of custody, contemporaneity, completeness, corroboration), plus an override path with audit-logged justification.
02
Discover
Patterns surfaced, hypotheses framed.
With the corpus ingested, Quarare runs across the records to surface Category Insights. Each Insight is a hypothesis the analyst evaluates. None are conclusions.
For the disbursements engagement, eleven Insights surface. Three are worth highlighting:
Three disbursements to Vendor X-3711 totaling $187,402 cluster between May and August 2024, exceeding the approval threshold of $50,000.
Supporting: 3 invoices, 2 bank statements, 1 approval-policy excerpt
Countersignature absent on 38 of 412 invoices over the engagement period. 12 of those involve Vendor X-3711.
Supporting: 38 vendor invoices, approval policy v3.2
Email thread from AP Manager to Vendor X-3711 references payment urgency 7 days before each of the three flagged disbursements.
Supporting: 3 email threads, AP Manager mailbox
The analyst reviews each Insight, opens the supporting documents, and decides what deserves promotion to a formal Finding. The first two Insights together suggest a substantive Finding about unauthorized disbursements. The third is interesting but speculative on its own; the analyst flags it for further investigation rather than immediate promotion.
Promotion is one click and preserves the supporting documents, the pattern category, and the analyst's reasoning in the audit trail.
03
Construct
Findings, scored as you write.
The analyst opens a new Finding, anchored to the two promoted Insights. The Daubert Score panel sits beside the editor. As the analyst writes, the score recomputes within roughly two seconds of an edit pause.
An early draft scores in the amber range:
The company engaged in fraudulent disbursements to Vendor X-3711, totaling $187,402, which were clearly unauthorized and bypassed the approval policy.
- Testability14/25
- Peer review11/25
- Error rate16/25
- Acceptance21/25
Conclusory language. Methodology not stated. Citation missing.
The analyst revises. Conclusory absolutes (fraudulent, clearly unauthorized) are softened to measured phrasing. The methodology is named. A peer-reviewed citation is added. The score moves into the green:
Based on the records reviewed, three disbursements totaling $187,402 appear to lack proper authorization under the company's stated approval policy. Each was processed during the period from May to August 2024 without the countersignature required for transactions exceeding $50,000. The pattern is consistent with the ledger-reconstruction methodology described in Bremser (2019).
- Testability22/25
- Peer review19/25
- Error rate21/25
- Acceptance22/25
Measured phrasing. Citation present. Methodology reproducible.
The score did not change what the analyst found. It changed how the analyst expressed what they found, in language defensible under cross-examination.
04
Defend
The expert report, ready for opposing counsel.
With the Findings constructed, the analyst compiles the expert report. Quarare assembles a structured document where every claim links to its supporting Findings, every Finding links to its supporting records, and every record carries its reliability score.
The audit trail captures every analyst action across the engagement:
The audit trail is exportable to CSV, JSON, or a signed PDF. When opposing counsel later questions the methodology, the reconstruction is line-by-line.
The chain from raw evidence to expert report is the product as much as the scoring engines are.
See it on your own engagement.
Request a walkthrough scoped to your practice. We will respond within two business days.