Policy Research and Material Compilation

The biggest challenge in researching a policy direction or industry topic isn’t “can’t find information” — it’s “too much information, too many sources, hard to judge reliability.” This case shows how to use LanMate to organize a complete research effort and output a research report with source annotations and cross-verification.

Skills Used

Built-in skills (installed with LanMate, ready out of the box): online research (lanmate-research — the source-rating and cross-verification methodology comes from it), Word documents (lanmate-docx)
Skill Store: Text Summarizer — consolidate multi-source material; Web Scraping Guide — collect web information in a disciplined way

Pain Points

Information is scattered across multiple channels; manual collection and organization is time-consuming
Hard to judge source reliability; self-media opinions are taken as facts
When organized into a report, source annotations are missing, making conclusions untraceable
Key data isn’t cross-verified; relying on a single perspective

Recommended Workflow

Step	What LanMate Does	What You Need to Confirm
1	Define the research framework: key questions, research dimensions, output structure	Research scope and depth
2	Multi-source search and collection, with source rating annotations (P0 official / P1 authoritative / P2 professional / P3 general)	Whether sources are sufficient
3	Cross-verify core claims (at least 3 independent sources); flag conflicting information	Whether verification is thorough
4	Compile into a structured research report, with each conclusion annotated with its source rating	Whether conclusions are well-founded
5	Output a Word report	Whether it’s ready for decision-making submission

Source Rating Guide

When conducting research, LanMate rates information sources by level. You can also request annotations by this standard in your instructions:

Level	Source Type	Examples
P0	Official release	Government websites, competent authority announcements, original legal text
P1	Authoritative secondary	Central media, authoritative industry media, listed company annual reports
P2	Professional community	Industry associations, professional forums, research reports
P3	General reference	Self-media, encyclopedias, blogs

Core claims require cross-verification from at least 3 independent sources; important data requires at least 2 sources.

Prompt Examples

Research Instruction

Please conduct research around "the Data Security Law's requirements for enterprise data processing."
Research dimensions:
1. Legal and regulatory requirements: key provisions of the Data Security Law and the Personal Information Protection Law
2. Enterprise compliance obligations: what legal obligations data processors must fulfill
3. Consequences of violations: legal liability and administrative penalties for non-compliance
4. Industry practices: common compliance approaches in government and enterprise organizations

Output requirements:
- Annotate each conclusion with a source rating (P0/P1/P2/P3) and a source link
- Core legal provisions must quote the original text (P0-level sources)
- When information from different sources conflicts, list each perspective and annotate it
- Mark information that cannot be confirmed as "unverified" — do not fabricate sources
- Output a Word research report with a clear structure, suitable for submission to leadership for reference

Information Verification Follow-Up

The conclusion you mentioned — "data processors should establish a full-process data security management system" —
what is the source? Are there other sources to corroborate it?
Please find the specific provision number in the original legal text.

Report Compilation

Please organize the collected research material into a complete research report:
Structure:
1. Research background and objectives
2. Legal and regulatory requirements (with original provision text)
3. Enterprise compliance obligations checklist
4. Consequences of violations and typical cases
5. Compliance recommendations (3-5 actionable recommendations)
6. Source list (arranged by rating)

Requirements:
- Annotate each conclusion with a source rating
- Annotate source links as footnotes in the body text
- Recommendations should be specific and actionable, not generic
- Output a Word document

Acceptance Criteria

Every conclusion has a source rating annotation (P0-P3)
Core legal provisions quote the original text, with provision numbers
Conflicting information from different sources is listed and annotated
Information that cannot be confirmed is marked “unverified”
The report has a clear structure, with actionable recommendations
The source list is complete and traceable by rating

Common Mistakes

Common Mistake	Why It Happens	Better Practice
Research scope not defined	“Research this industry” is too vague	Specify research dimensions and key questions
AI fabricates sources	The model tends to give complete answers	State explicitly “do not fabricate sources”; when following up, ask for specific links
Key data not cross-verified	Trusting a single source	Core claims need at least 3 sources; important data needs at least 2 sources
Sources not rated	Self-media and official announcements mixed together	Require P0-P3 rating annotations
Research too shallow	Only searched the first page of results	Specify research depth; require multi-channel collection