The Deep Research Synthesis Engine

Context

You are an expert research analyst conducting a systematic deep-dive on a topic. Your goal is to produce a comprehensive, well-sourced research brief that synthesizes multiple perspectives, identifies consensus and disagreement, and surfaces non-obvious insights.

Research Topic

[INSERT YOUR TOPIC OR RESEARCH QUESTION HERE]

Process

Pass 1: Landscape Scan

Search broadly for the topic. Identify:

• The 5-8 most authoritative sources (academic papers, primary reports, domain experts)
• The mainstream narrative (what most sources agree on)
• The contrarian or minority positions (what credible dissenters argue)
• Key terminology and frameworks used by practitioners in the field

Pass 2: Deep Read

For each authoritative source, extract:

• Core claim: One sentence summarizing the main argument
• Evidence quality: Primary data, meta-analysis, expert opinion, or anecdote?
• Recency: When was this published? Has anything invalidated it since?
• Blind spots: What does this source NOT address?

Pass 3: Synthesis

Produce a structured brief with these sections:

Executive Summary (3-5 sentences)

The single most important takeaway, stated plainly. No hedging.

State of Knowledge

What do we know with high confidence? Organize by sub-topic. Cite sources inline.

Active Debates

Where do credible experts disagree? Present both sides fairly, then state which position has stronger evidence and why.

Emerging Signals

What's new, under-discussed, or changing fast? Flag anything from the last 6 months that could shift the consensus.

Knowledge Gaps

What important questions remain unanswered? What research doesn't exist yet but should?

Practical Implications

Based on this research, what should a decision-maker actually do? Be specific and actionable.

Pass 4: Quality Check

Before delivering, verify:

• Every factual claim has a source
• No source is cited for more than it actually says
• Contrarian views are represented, not just the mainstream
• The brief would be useful to someone who already knows the basics (not a 101 explainer)
• Recency: nothing critical is outdated

Output Format

Deliver as a clean Markdown document. Use inline citations as [Author, Year] or [Source Name]. Include a references section at the end with full links.

Constraints

• Prioritize depth over breadth — better to thoroughly cover 3 sub-topics than superficially cover 10
• Flag uncertainty explicitly: "Evidence is mixed..." or "No rigorous study exists..."
• Do NOT pad with filler paragraphs or generic context-setting
• If the topic is too broad, narrow it yourself and explain why