Preserve the connection.
A proposed review view would reconcile the package against its transmittal and delivery register. It would flag the revision mismatch and show the linked review comment, while leaving acceptance status unchanged.
RAIN / Professional Services
Which versionactually reached the client?
In a project handover, the newest file is not necessarily the issued or accepted record. Architecture and engineering teams need to connect revisions, permitted use, recipients and unresolved comments. This research direction focuses on reconstructing one delivery package rather than building an unrestricted document assistant.
Exploratory use case
INTELLIGENCE BELONGS WHERE THE DATA LIVES.
THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES / PROJECT HANDOVER QUESTION
Issued-document history for architecture and engineering teams
Professional Services / Project handover / PROPOSED WORKFLOW
An inspectable chain of decisions.
- 01
Choose one completed delivery
The project manager selects an approved package with a known issue history. Define the question and nominate a document controller to establish the reference answer.
- 02
Preserve the delivery metadata
Connect each candidate source to its document ID, revision, status and transmittal. Keep superseded information identifiable and restrict access to the agreed project.
- 03
Reconcile the package
Evaluate whether the proposed view finds missing or inconsistent items without mistaking a later draft for an issued correction. Retain links to the underlying record.
- 04
Review the handover account
The discipline lead and project manager check the account against technical and client records. Measure correct attribution and review effort before proposing a larger collection.
AN EVIDENCE TRAIL WORTH FOLLOWING
The issued drawing and the old appendix
An engineering consultancy prepares a building-services handover package. A revised drawing is included, but the accompanying equipment schedule comes from an earlier issue.
Professional Services / Project handover / PILOT SCENARIO01 — REVIEW NOTES
Return to the source.
The document controller verifies what was issued; the discipline lead checks technical consistency; the project manager and client representative resolve the outstanding handover item through their agreed process.
Illustrative evaluation scenario for architecture and engineering practice. Other professional-service disciplines require their own source conventions, permissions and review criteria. RAIN document-workflow capability is not established today.
THE INPUTS THAT MATTER
Follow the record.
Choose a source to see the context it adds to this proposed review.
Deliverable register
Document identifier, discipline, revision, status, responsible author and the project milestone the deliverable is meant to support.
SCOPED INPUT · HUMAN REVIEWIssue and receipt history
Transmittal identifier, issue date, stated purpose, package contents and recorded recipients. A file’s modified date cannot substitute for its issue history.
SCOPED INPUT · HUMAN REVIEWReview and change record
Reviewer comments, requested changes, response owner and the source record showing whether each comment was addressed or remains open.
SCOPED INPUT · HUMAN REVIEWHandover requirements
The agreed information checklist, client acceptance record, outstanding items and the person responsible for aftercare or the next delivery stage.
SCOPED INPUT · HUMAN REVIEWWHAT A PILOT SHOULD PROVE
Define useful
before you measure it.
Suggested evaluation criteria. Set the baseline and acceptance thresholds with the sector team before a trial.
- 01Issued-version accuracy
- Sampled retrievals that identify the actual issued revision and its supporting transmittal, divided by all sampled retrievals. Score a newest-but-unissued file as an error.
- 02Unresolved handover items
- Required package items with missing acceptance, inconsistent revisions or unclosed comments. Compare the proposed findings with a document controller’s reviewed checklist.
- 03Package reconstruction effort
- Time a reviewer needs to establish what was sent, to whom and with which open questions. Compare identical historical packages and record correction effort.
THE OPERATING BOUNDARY
Be precise about the scope.
Issue and acceptance remain distinct
UK BIM guidance separates information revision from its status and authorized use. A summary must preserve those distinctions; it must not promote a draft or infer client acceptance from an email mention.
Keep engagement permissions intact
Use only material approved for the chosen project and audience. The professional lead retains technical judgment, and contractual acceptance remains with the people authorized under that engagement.
Handover continues into use
RIBA’s Plan of Work includes handover and aftercare. An evaluation should preserve outstanding actions and ownership after delivery, rather than mark the entire project complete when a package is sent.
RESEARCH & CONTEXT
The thinking behind
this use case.
Primary sources reviewed September 2026. These explain the sector context; the scenario and pilot measures are RAIN proposals, not reported customer results or source endorsements.
- 01
UK BIM Framework
Guidance Part C — Facilitating the Common Data Environment, Edition 1The 2020 guidance distinguishes revision, information status and exchange between project parties. It supplies a concrete model for checking what a recipient was entitled to use.
- 02
Royal Institute of British Architects
RIBA Plan of Work 2020 Overview — Handover and UseThe handover stages include aftercare, outstanding work and project feedback. The proposed evaluation therefore follows ownership and unresolved items beyond the date of issue.
03 / A FEW DETAILS
Worth understanding.
Is a general document assistant available?
No general document-assistant capability is established by the current simulator. This page describes a possible study that would require its own implementation.
Would outputs constitute professional advice?
The proposed output is a set of source references and operational context for review. Professional judgments remain with the qualified people responsible for the work.
Professional Services / EXPLORE THE FIT
Bring the question.
Define the study.
Start with the records, the review team, and the evidence a useful outcome would need. RAIN’s current implementation is a battery-storage simulator; this sector workflow requires its own validation.