Buyer prompt · published evidence

Compare legal AI platforms on document, matter, contract, research, billing, email, identity, knowledge, API, and workflow integrations.

An exact prompt-level view of which reviewed brands surfaced and which public URLs the configured AI models cited. No answer text or tenant data is published.

Intent
commercial
Model providers
3
Categories
1
Last observed
Aug 30, 2026, 12:00 AM UTC
Competitive outcome

Brands surfaced

Ordered by provider breadth, then total mentions and owned-domain citations. A mention is not an endorsement or a position claim.

#BrandCategoryProvidersMentionsOwned citationsProvider evidence
01Luminanceluminance.comLegal AI110Openai
02Clio Duoclio.comLegal AI101Gemini
03Harveyharvey.aiLegal AI101Gemini
04Ironclad AIironcladapp.comLegal AI101Gemini
05Lexis+ AIlexisnexis.comLegal AI101Openai
Model comparison

Answer matrix

One row per configured provider and category snapshot. Hashes prove answer identity without publishing stored answer text.

ProviderModel versionCategoryBrands surfacedCitationsUnique domainsAnswer hash
Openaiopenai/gpt-4o-miniLegal AILexis+ AI · Luminance55462b6096…981e8
Anthropicanthropic/claude-haiku-4-5Legal AINone observed00088b8cac…24040
Geminigoogle/gemini-2.5-flashLegal AIHarvey · Clio Duo · Ironclad AI1010a90b129f…6900a
URL-derived citations

Sources cited

Hostnames are derived from the returned public URLs. Best position is the smallest citation position observed.

Snapshot IDs15434873-391f-4505-b99c-df10e62d922c
Corpus versionslegal-ai-platforms-2026-07-27
Benchmark versions4-legal-ai-platforms-2026-07-27-models-64232fd32583

Coverage: Legal AI. Full answers stored: no · Full answers published: no · Tenant data included: no.