Arbitr checks everything you publish against your company's memory.

Your approved claims, your terminology, your brand and legal rules, your reviewers' corrections - in any language, in any market.

Your rules reach everything you publish, without anyone having to remember them.

Right is not our judgement. It is yours, and most of it is already decided - in a claims register, a brand guide, a legal sign-off, a terminology file, and in the answers the same few people keep being asked to give. Nobody writing a product page on a Tuesday afternoon can hold all of that at once, and they should not have to.

Specialised models built for checking, in every language you publish in.

Your teams keep writing with whatever they already use, and Arbitr connects to it. What runs underneath is built for a different job - comparing two versions of a document, matching a term, testing a claim against the rule that governs it.

Everything is checked. What is wrong gets corrected - by Arbitr, or by the person you name.

Whether it is a web page, a campaign, a filing or an answer from an assistant, it takes the same route. Most of it matches your rules and goes out. What does not is corrected automatically where you allow that, or sent to a named person where you would rather decide.

Your rules are the same everywhere. What each market asks of you is not.

A claim approved in English is not automatically a claim you can make elsewhere. Arbitr keeps your approved version and each market's requirements side by side, and checks against both - so the same claim can pass in one market and be held in another, for a reason you can read.

How we help

Agents that already know what you have approved.

Deploy agents to execute particular jobs, running on those same models with your memory behind them. For the jobs every company has, Arbitr has one ready to go. For everything else, your people build their own, and your rules govern those too.

Your reviewers stop reading everything, and start reading only what needs a decision.

Review is slow because nobody knows in advance which part is the problem, so somebody reads all of it. Arbitr already knows which part, and why. A reviewer opens one held item with the rule and the reason attached, rather than forty pages with neither.

Every decision, kept.

For a regulated company this is often the part that matters most. Not that a check happened, but that you can show it happened, what it decided, and who signed it off.

Twelve months later, when someone asks why a claim went out in that form, the answer is a record rather than a recollection.

And every decision makes the next check better.

This is the part that compounds. Memory is earned through accountable decisions - it is not scraped from every draft, and it does not learn silently. A person decides, and the decision is what the memory keeps, with their name and the date against it.

What was checked, what was held, and whether it is getting better.

Every check leaves a number behind. Over a quarter those numbers become the answer to the question your board will ask - is this working, and how do you know.