Simulation-based preparation intelligence
Zapper Edge turns past hearing records into structured concerns, then simulates how stakeholders are likely to respond. Teams rehearse against a consistent framework, score their answers and see where preparation is thin.
The challenge
Public hearings and similar high-stakes sessions are hard to prepare for. Stakeholders raise concerns that are difficult to predict, and preparation often depends on individual experience, consultants and informal notes, so it differs from one project to the next.
Past transcripts and recordings hold the real concerns, but nobody has time to read them all. Without a structured way to learn from them and rehearse, teams enter the room unsure which objections will come and how well they would answer.
What it does
Transcript intelligence
Past hearing transcripts and recordings are processed to pull out who raised which concerns and how they were expressed, turning unstructured records into usable evidence.
Concern taxonomy
Concerns are sorted into a structured set of themes, so analysis is consistent across hearings and projects and trends can be compared.
Persona-based simulation
Stakeholders are modelled as personas built from past behaviour, so likely questions and objections can be simulated before the real session.
Response scoring
Practice answers are scored against the persona and the concern, giving the team feedback on how well a response addresses what was raised.
Gap analysis
The system compares prepared material with the concerns likely to arise and highlights topics where the preparation is weak or missing.
Reusable framework
The same method is applied across projects, so lessons from one hearing carry forward and preparation becomes a repeatable process.
How it works
Collect past records
Transcripts and recordings of earlier sessions are gathered. Recordings are transcribed, and the text is prepared for analysis.
Extract and structure
A model identifies concerns and speakers, and each concern is mapped to the taxonomy so findings are consistent and comparable.
Build and simulate
Personas are built from the structured findings. Team members rehearse against them, and each answer is scored in the moment.
Review the gaps
A gap report shows which concerns are covered, which are weak and what to prepare next, for a person to review and act on.
Under the hood
- Inputs
- Transcripts
- Audio and video recordings
- Speech to text
- Analysis
- Any chosen LLM
- Concern taxonomy
- Sentiment over time
- Simulation
- Persona models
- Response scoring
- Scenario runner
- Delivery
- Web application
- Reports
- JSON
Inside the harness
Evaluation
Simulated responses and scores are checked against past records, so the team can see how closely a persona reflects what stakeholders actually said.
Guardrails
Personas draw only on the supplied records, and outputs are labelled as simulations so they are not mistaken for predictions of fact.
Security
Hearing material is handled under access control, and sensitive material can be processed in an environment you choose.
Audit
Source records, simulation runs and scores are logged, so a team can show how its preparation was developed.
Business outcome
Fewer surprises in the room. Teams meet likely concerns in rehearsal first, so the real session is less likely to bring objections nobody had considered.
Preparation that repeats. A common taxonomy and method replace one-off preparation, so quality does not depend on who happens to lead.
Better answers under pressure. Scored practice shows where responses are weak, giving speakers a chance to improve before they face stakeholders.
Less reliance on outside help. Insight from past records stays in-house, which reduces the need to rebuild preparation from scratch for each project.
Where it is used
- Preparing a project team for a public hearing using concerns raised in earlier sessions.
- Rehearsing a regulatory or planning consultation against simulated stakeholder personas.
- Analysing recorded town halls or community meetings for recurring themes and sentiment.
- Training spokespeople to answer hard questions, with scored practice and a gap report.
Frequently asked questions
Does it predict what stakeholders will say?
No. It simulates likely concerns based on past records and flags them for preparation. Outputs are rehearsal aids, not forecasts, and a person decides how to use them.
What source material is needed?
Past transcripts or recordings of similar sessions. Recordings are transcribed first. The more relevant the history, the more useful the concern taxonomy and personas will be.
Can we choose the model?
Yes. The analysis and simulation steps are model agnostic, and sensitive material can be processed with an open-weight or local model if your policy requires it.
Who reviews the results?
Your team. Extracted concerns, personas and gap reports are reviewed by people before they shape a preparation plan, and the underlying sources stay linked for checking.
See it on your own documents and data
Tell us what you want to automate and we will show you how it runs inside the harness.