Consensus
A hosted search product that answers questions against scientific papers and provides citations to the underlying research.
Score calculation
(2 + 7 + 3 + 1 + 7) ÷ 5 = 4.0
5 of six dimensions rated. Unrated dimensions are excluded from the average.
Full scoring method ↗Setup details
Consensus consumer literature-search web app and API query handling; upstream foundation-model training data is not assessed.
What fits your needs
Consensus consumer literature-search web app and API query handling; upstream foundation-model training data is not assessed.
Good fit
Use it for fast evidence discovery and source-linked summaries across published research.
Tradeoffs to expect
Tradeoffs
It depends on a hosted search and AI pipeline; check important claims against cited papers and current plan terms.
How to switch
Switching
Save cited paper identifiers, exports and review notes independently so another research workflow can reuse them.
Practical questions
Before use
Check paper links, population and method in the cited studies; avoid sending confidential unpublished data unless the account agreement permits it.
Consensus has identifiable product documentation, but no measured energy footprint or clean-electricity sourcing evidence for the assessed route.
See the evidence
The official sources describe how Consensus is delivered and used. They provide no dated, quantitative energy or water report for this product and no evidence tying its requests to clean electricity. The pages reviewed also name no energy-saving workload or compute control.
1 + 1 reporting + 0 electricity + 0 controls = 2/10. This grades documented practices and transparency.
Per-request electricity and water use, regional power mix and independently verified clean-electricity sourcing for Consensus remain unpublished.
- Reporting1/3
- The Consensus documentation identifies the service route, but provides no dated, quantitative energy or water report for this product.
- Electricity sourcing0/3
- No reviewed official source ties this workload to metered, regional or hourly clean electricity; this is an evidence gap.
- Resource controls0/3
- The reviewed Consensus documentation names no energy-saving compute or workload setting for this route; no physical savings are inferred from speed, pricing or general configuration choices.
Water disclosure
Water reporting has not been assessed for this choice.
Training-data rights vary with the model selected for Consensus; check that model’s source and license.
See the evidence
Consensus can use different model routes. Its product policy describes how requests are handled, while training-data provenance and permissions depend on the selected model. Review that release’s source disclosure, license and creator controls separately.
The selected model name, version and provider can vary by feature or setting. Those details are needed for a model-specific training-data review.
Consensus says queries and uploaded papers are not used for model training, but authorized model providers process them and may retain them briefly under their own terms.
See the evidence
Consensus NLP’s August 2026 policy says user content is not used to train its or third-party models. It sends queries, conversation context, retrieved paper content and uploaded documents to named model providers without attaching account identifiers; providers can retain content briefly under their terms. Search history and account data can be deleted, while general retention is purpose-based.
Provider-specific short retention and safety checks remain possible; the policy does not specify one deletion deadline for every data type or backup.
Consensus identifies scholarly sources and discloses its provider-backed AI workflow, but the search application and model stack are hosted and not released as source code or weights.
See the evidence
The cited product pages do not provide a complete source release, reproducible model pipeline and license package for the full assessed service. Individual model licenses and artifacts can differ.
Public sources for Consensus describe the product, but do not report pay, worker voice or independent safeguards for the people who build and support it.
See the evidence
The official pages reviewed for Consensus do not report worker pay and conditions, representation or independent follow-through across employees, contractors and AI supply-chain workers. The low evidence score records what those sources leave unanswered; it is not a finding of mistreatment.
1 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 1/10. Documented worker protections; missing disclosure is an evidence gap.
Pay, contractor protections, grievance outcomes and independent checks for Consensus's wider workforce remain unreported in the cited product documentation.
- Pay & conditions0/3
- The reviewed product and legal pages give no qualifying pay or conditions disclosure for AI supply-chain workers.
- Worker voice & remedy0/3
- No worker representation, grievance or remedy mechanism was established in these cited official materials.
- Evidence & follow-through0/3
- No independent worker-level assurance covering the product supply chain was established.
No military relationship for Consensus was identified in the official sources reviewed for this profile.
See the evidence
The cited product and policy material does not describe a defense customer or military deployment by Consensus. The score reflects an unverified relationship with no published safeguards in these sources, not a confirmed absence.
7 base + 0 safeguard adjustment = 7/10 (0 of 9 safeguard points; every 3 adds 1). No military relationship was established in the cited sources. This ranks above known defense ties without claiming a verified clean record.
This source review does not cover undisclosed customers, contracts, subcontractors or deployments.
- Use restrictions0/4
- No binding military-specific restriction was found in the cited public pages.
- Enforcement & oversight0/3
- No military-specific oversight or remedy was established in the cited public pages.
- Relationship disclosure0/2
- The cited material does not disclose a relevant military relationship.
The official pages reviewed describe the product, service and user terms; they do not identify a defense relationship or deployment. No identity, nationality or unrelated-company inference is used.
Military rubric ↗Consensus is not named in the two official BNC campaign lists; this is not an endorsement.
See the evidence
The check is limited to the BNC consumer-boycott guide and No Tech campaign. Neither list names Consensus; the result says nothing about other campaigns or suppliers.
This check does not cover every BDS campaign, local campaign, supplier, investment or subsequent list change; it is not an endorsement or clean-record conclusion.