PWV Portfolio Feed

Papers that fail any strict criteria will appear at the bottom of the screening results page with a label showing they were excluded based on strict criteria. You can still decide to manually include them if needed.

This gives you full control over your inclusion logic in Elicit.

Traditional systematic reviews have strict inclusion/exclusion criteria, where any paper has to meet all criteria to be screened in. 

Now, you can enable strict criteria within Elicit to achieve the same results and automatically screen out papers failing to meet a strict criterion.

We’ve made two updates to make Systematic Reviews in Elicit more rigorous and defensible:

Strict screening criteria - Mark criteria as 'strict' to exclude papers that fail to meet them.

80-paper Systematic Review reports - The report at the end of your Systematic Review can use 2x the papers.

Coding agents are amazing.

We used machine translation + human review for Tuist's i18n. Traded some quality for no mixed-language UX.

But some translations broke our conventions, docs wouldn't build.

Fix? Tell the agent to use Weblate CLI, verify it compiles locally. Done.

Can’t wait for agents putting SOC2 controls in place, taking screenshots and running penetration tests for another auditor agent to check that evidences are in place and give you a conventionally accepted certificate.

My two cents: Develocity is so coupled to Postgres   which their ICP is fine hosting, that they’d not consider introducing an analytical database, since it’d allow them to provide a multi-tenant hosted version, and that would serve customers they are not interested in.

Has anyone seen a pattern in open source SaaS products where at any given page you can copy a piece of context that can serve as a starting point for a coding agent to make a contribution to that page?

We've upgraded the import experience for Vitess databases.

You can now monitor per-table progress, replication lag, and perform data verification as a part of your migration to PlanetScale.