# Multiple-meeting transcript analysis worksheet

OpenMax editorial worksheet, revised 2026-09-04. Requirements for an evaluation, not proof of available product functions. Do not put confidential material into a new tool without appropriate authorization. This form contains intentional completion fields; they are not claims about a performed customer project.

## 1. Set the question and inventory

- Decision to resolve: [complete]
- Period and inventory origin: [complete]
- Expected distinct meeting IDs: [complete]
- Available and missing meeting IDs: [complete]
- Scope statement for the final brief: [complete]

Example: six inventoried meetings, five included. Eight files are not eight meetings. Identify potential omissions beyond the inventory rather than implying a complete organizational record.

## 2. Check access and versions

- Authorized purpose, audience and confirming owner: [complete]
- Selected file and version for each meeting: [complete]
- Duplicate file IDs and retained counterpart: [complete]
- Superseded version and correction record: [complete]
- Excluded sources and minimal exclusion reasons: [complete]

Example: exclude F02 as F01's duplicate, F04 as the old M03 version, and F08/M06 for restricted access. COR-01 corrects September 12 to September 21 in the transcript; it is not a second business decision or verified real audio.

## 3. Normalize time and speaker identity

- Original event timestamps with offsets: [complete]
- Derived UTC timestamps or unresolved timezone: [complete]
- Export and correction timestamps in separate fields: [complete]
- Original labels and verified identity mappings: [complete]
- Authority evidence for each material approval: [complete]

Example: M01 is 2026-08-25T00:00:00Z; M02 is 2026-08-25T01:00:00Z despite its earlier local date. M04 Speaker 2 remains unidentified. Do not infer authority merely from order or title.

## 4. Extract per-meeting claims

- Meeting ID and selected version for each claim: [complete]
- Proposed wording and semantic state: [complete]
- Exact excerpt locator and surrounding condition: [complete]
- Owner, acceptance and deadline evidence: [complete]
- Unknowns or boundary passages needing review: [complete]

Prompt to adapt: separate proposals, approvals, conditional offers, accepted tasks, progress reports and unresolved questions. Return source locators. Do not infer agreement from silence. Example M02-L01 is a conditional offer; M03-L03 is acceptance.

## 5. Group themes and define denominators

- Task-specific theme definitions: [complete]
- Included distinct meeting count: [complete]
- Meeting IDs supporting each theme: [complete]
- Counterexamples and contrary passages: [complete]
- Calculation with numerator, denominator and unit: [complete]

Example: launch_date appears in M01–M04, so 4 / 5 = 80% of included meetings discuss it. It is not a vote or participant support rate. Inventory coverage is 5 / 6 ≈ 83.3%, not accuracy.

## 6. Reconcile current decision state

- Current candidate state with supporting approval: [complete]
- Later proposals and their dispositions: [complete]
- Transcript correction versus decision replacement: [complete]
- Conflicting authority or unresolved relationship: [complete]
- Specific question and responsible resolver: [complete]

Example: M03-L01 approves September 21; M04-L02 leaves it in force despite a September 14 proposal. Never use latest mention alone as the replacement rule.

## 7. Review material conclusions

- Candidate claim IDs and review coverage: [complete]
- Selected source plus contrary evidence: [complete]
- Support, reject or revise decision and reason: [complete]
- Human reviewer, reviewed version and date: [complete]
- Reopening rule when source evidence changes: [complete]

Example: C02/C05/C08 supported; C01/C03/C04/C06/C07 rejected. The authored candidate set yields 3 / 8 = 37.5% support as written, not model accuracy. Review every material commitment before using it operationally.

## 8. Publish and authorize handoff separately

- Bounded brief and excluded-meeting disclosure: [complete]
- Confirmed owner, deadline and destination: [complete]
- Existing-task check and draft-only trial outcome: [complete]
- Approval required before a real write or notification: [complete]
- Correction owner for published claims and downstream tasks: [complete]

Example conclusion: September 21 remains approved within the included corpus. Omar accepted the plan task due August 28 and later reported a draft. Plan acceptance and test execution remain unconfirmed as complete. M06 is excluded. Verify current OpenMax availability independently; the meeting-to-CRM demo was forthcoming at the editorial review date.