Anapoly AI Labs

Tag: ai tools

  • Methodology & tool-kits

    Transparancy label:human-only

    Yesterday’s discussion crystallised some ideas that I have been teasing at recently. Namely that we could develop our labs as a place where we:

    (a) develop a methodology and its associated tool-kits for the implementation of AI in an enterprise; and

    (b) use these in a synthetic environment to help business people gain confidence in moving forward with AI.

    Our value to clients would derive from the relevance and usefulness of the methodology and tool-kits.

    Methodology: a comprehensive system of principles, processes, and rules that governs a specific discipline to ensure consistency and repeatability. It serves as a structural framework defining what must be done and who is responsible. It is applied through specialized tool-kits consisting of templates, software, and techniques that enable practitioners to apply the theoretical standards to real-world tasks.

    To pick up on the point Dennis emphasised, an early part of the methodology might be analysis of how an enterprise actually works (rather than what the non-existent, incomplete or out of date documentation says). The process for this would involve eliciting information from people in the enterprise. A tool-kit would enable AI to be configured for that purpose within the specific context of that enterprise. 

  • Using local-only AI in a micro-enterprise

    Transparency label: AI-assisted

    I’ve added a briefing note in the Resources area that sets out an approach for a micro-enterprise to run AI entirely on local machines. This creates a system that is private, predictable, comparatively inexpensive, and easy to expand in small steps.

    The note explains how a three-layer model for controlling the behaviour of an AI ( business context at the top, governance rules in the middle, and task instructions at the bottom) can still apply even when everything sits on a laptop, and how a small software component (the orchestrator) can keep the whole arrangement predictable and safe.

    If you’re curious about “local-only AI” for a micro-enterprise, or wondering what it might look like in practice, you should find this a useful starting point.

    Read the note: Using Local-Only AI in a Micro-Enterprise

  • Precision Content Prompt Pack

    Precision Content Prompt Pack

    Version: 01, 1 August 2025
    Authors: Alec Fearon and ChatGPT-4o.

    Transparency label: AI-assisted

    Purpose

    This is a six-step process for converting a source document into a structured format that is easy for an LLM to understand. The format is based on the Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) and ideas developed by Precision Content. It has the following content types:

    • Reference (what something is)
    • Concept (how to think about it)
    • Principle (why it works)
    • Process (how it unfolds)
    • Task (how to do it)

    The six steps are carried out in sequence, one at a time. They clean, segment, type, clarify, and re-package the original source material. There is human review at the end of each step.

    To use

    First, open a chat in ChatGPT and upload this file into the chat; it is in Markdown (.md) because that is easy for LLMs to read.
    Note: you can drag & drop the file into the chat or use the upload button.

    Tell ChatGPT: “Please create a new canvas from this markdown file so we can work together using the precision content prompt pack.” ChatGPT will:

    • Read the file
    • Create a canvas
    • Use each ## heading to split the file into separate cards
    • Preserve formatting and headings

    Then upload the source file into the chat. Tell ChatGPT: “Please convert the uploaded file [filename] into precision content using the steps defined in the canvas Anapoly AI Labs Precision Content Prompt Pack. Begin Step 0.”

    ChatGPT will extract the content of the file and clean it as per Step 0 – Pre-Processing. It will paste the cleaned material into the “📄 Source Document” card for you to review. That sets you up to proceed with the following steps. The output of each step is put into the “Work Area – Output by Step” card in the canvas. Edit the output of each step as necessary before proceeding to the next step.

    The final output is put into the card “Review Notes / Final Output / Glossary”. You can tell ChatGPT to export it from there as a file for download. If it is to be used as reference material, filetype .md is recommended.

    Step 0 – Pre-Processing

    Purpose: Clean the raw input before analysis.

    Prompt:

    Clean the following document for structured analysis. Remove:

    • Repeated headers/footers
    • Navigation links, timestamps, metadata
    • Formatting glitches (e.g. broken paragraphs)

    Retain all meaningful content exactly as written. Do not summarise, interpret, or reword.

    Step 1 – Segmenting the Document

    Purpose: Divide into discrete, meaningful segments.

    Prompt:

    Break this cleaned document into a numbered list of coherent segments. Each segment should reflect a single topic, paragraph, or unit of meaning.

    Format:
    [1] [text]
    [2] [text]

    Step 2 – Typing the Segments

    Purpose: Label each segment by information type.

    Types:

    • Reference – what something is
    • Concept – how to think about it
    • Principle – why it works
    • Process – how it unfolds
    • Task – how to do it

    Prompt:

    For each segment, assign the most relevant type. Include a short justification.

    Format:
    [1] Type: [type] – [reason]

    Step 3 – Rewriting for Precision

    Purpose: Convert to structured, plain-language modules.

    Prompt:

    Rewrite each segment according to its type:

    • Use short declarative sentences
    • Bullet points for steps or lists
    • Avoid vagueness or repetition

    Step 4 – Grouping by Type

    Purpose: Reorganise output by information type.

    Prompt:

    Sort all rewritten segments under clear headings:

    • 🗂 Reference
    • 🧠 Concept
    • ⚖️ Principle
    • 🔄 Process
    • 🔧 Task

    Preserve segment numbers.

    Step 5 – Structured Output Bundle

    Purpose: Package the content for reuse.

    Prompt:

    Format output with markdown or minimal HTML.
    Include metadata at the top:

    Title: [your title]
Source: [file name or link]
Date: [today's date]
Content type: Precision Content

    Step 6 – Glossary Generation

    Purpose: Extract and define key terms.

    Prompt:

    Identify important terms in the text and define each using only information in the document.

    Format:
    Term: [definition]

    📄 Source Document

    [Paste the cleaned or raw source text here after Step 0.]

    Work Area – Output by Step

    Use this section to draft segmented content, types, rewrites, and grouped outputs.

    Review Notes / Final Output / Glossary

    Use this area for human commentary, final outputs, or glossary results.

  • Collaboration in ChatGPT?

    transparency label: human only

    There are reports that:

    OpenAI has been quietly developing collaboration features for ChatGPT that would let multiple users work together on documents and chat about projects, a direct assault on Microsoft’s core productivity business. The designs have been in development for nearly a year, with OpenAI’s Canvas feature serving as a first step toward full document collaboration tools.

    Source: The Information via BRXND Dispatch

    This would be a change towards something like simultaneous collaboration with colleagues on a shared document in Microsoft Office. At present, a ChatGPT Team account allows more than one person in the Team account to work in a project space and to take part in the chats within that project, but only one person at a time, as I understand it.

  • First thoughts on a lab framework

    transparency label: Human-only

    A few hours spent with ChatGPT-o3 resulting in good first draft of a framework for thinking about our labs. It covers

    • types of lab
    • the roles of people involved with the labs
    • the core technical configuration of a lab
    • assets needed to launch, operate, and archive a lab
    • a naming convention for these assets

    No doubt the framework will need to be tweaked and added to as our ideas mature.

    The chat with o3 was a valuable mind-clearing exercise for me, and I was impressed by how much more “intellectual” it is compared to the 4o model. Like many intellectuals, it also displayed a lack of common sense on occasions, especially when I asked for simple formatting corrections to the canvas we were editing together. The 4o model is much more agile in that respect.

    During the chat, when the flow with ChatGPT didn’t feel right, I hopped back and forth to consult with Perplexity and NotebookLM. Their outputs provided interestingly and usefully different perspectives that helped to clear the logjam.

    A decision arising from my joint AI consultation process was the choice of Google Workspace for the office productivity suite within our labs. This will allow for much better collaboration when using office tools with personal licences than would be the case with Microsoft Office 365. Given the ad hoc nature of labs and the cost constaints we have, this is an important consideration.

  • Drafting Anapoly’s first Lab Setup with ChatGPT

    Transparency label: AI‑heavy (ChatGPT model o3 produced primary content; Alec Fearon curated and lightly edited)

    Purpose of experiment

    Use ChatGPT as a thinking partner to create a first draft of an acclimatisation lab setup for Anapoly AI Labs and to compare output quality between two models (o3 and 4o).

    Author and date

    Alec Fearon, 24 June 2025

    Participants

    • Alec Fearon – experiment lead
    • ChatGPT model o3 – reasoning model
    • ChatGPT model 4o – comparison model

    Lab configuration and setup

    Interaction took place entirely in the ChatGPT Document Workbench. The first prompt was duplicated into two branches, each tied to a specific model. All files needed for reference (conceptual framework, lab note structure) were pre‑uploaded in the project space.

    Preamble

    Alec wanted a concise, critical first draft to stimulate team discussion. The exercise also served as a live test of whether o3’s “reasoning” advantage produced materially better drafts than the newer 4o model.

    (more…)

  • That was the moment …

    transparency label: Human only

    It hit me that generative AI is the first kind of technology that can tell you how to use itself. You ask it what to do, and it explains the tool, the technique, the reasoning—it teaches you. And that flipped something for me. It stopped being a support tool and became more like a co-founder.

    A quote from BRXND Dispatch, a SubStack newsletter by Noah Brier, which featured Craig Hepburn, former Chief Digital Officer at Art Basel.

  • Lab Note: modelling our own use of AI tools

    Transparency label: AI-heavy

    Purpose of experiment

    To identify and configure an AI toolkit for Anapoly AI Labs that credibly models the use of general-purpose AI tools in a small consultancy setting.

    Author and date

    Alec Fearon, 24 June 2025

    Participants

    Alec Fearon, with Ray Holland and Dennis Silverwood in email consultation
    ChatGPT-4o

    Lab configuration and setup

    This setup models a real-world micro-consultancy with three collaborators. It assumes limited budget, modest technical support, and a practical orientation. We aim to reflect the toolkit choices we might recommend to participants in Anapoly AI Labs sessions.

    Preamble

    If Anapoly AI Labs is to be a credible venture, we believe it must model the behaviour it explores. That means our own internal work should demonstrate how small teams or sole traders might use AI tools in everyday tasks – writing, research, analysis, and communication – not just talk about it. This lab note outlines our proposed working configuration.

    Procedure

    We identified common functions we ourselves perform (and expect others will want to model), for example:

    • Writing, summarising, and critiquing text
    • Researching topics and checking facts
    • Extracting and organising information from documents
    • Sharing and collaborating on files
    • Managing project knowledge

    We then selected tools that:

    • Are available off the shelf
    • Require no specialist training
    • Are affordable on a small-business budget
    • Can be configured and used transparently

    Findings

    Core Tools Selected

    FunctionToolLicenceNotes
    Writing & promptingChatGPT Team£25–30/m/userMain workspace for drafting, reasoning, editing
    Search & fact-checkingPerplexity Pro$20/m/userFast, source-aware, good for validating facts
    Document interrogationNotebookLMFree (for now)Project libraries, good with PDFs and notes
    Office appsMS 365 or Google£5–15/m/userMatches common small business setups
    Visual inputsChatGPT VisionIncluded with ChatGPTUsed for images, scans, and screenshots

    Discussion of findings

    This configuration balances affordability, realism, and capability. We expect participants in Anapoly AI Labs to have similar access to these tools, or to be able to get it. By using these tools ourselves in Anapoly’s day-to-day running, we:

    • Gain first hand experience to share
    • Create reusable examples from real work
    • Expose gaps, workarounds, and lessons worth documenting

    We considered whether personal licences could be shared during lab sessions. Technically, they can’t: individual ChatGPT and Perplexity licences are for single-user use. While enforcement is unlikely, we’ve chosen to adopt the position that participants should bring their own their own AI tools – free or paid – to lab sessions as part of the learning experience. This avoids ambiguity about licencing and sets the ethical standard we want to maintain.

    Conclusions

    This toolkit would enable us to model our own small-business operations, treating Anapoly itself as one of the lab setups. That would reinforce our stance: we don’t claim to be AI experts; we’re practitioners asking the questions small businesses wish they had time to ask, and showing what happens when you do.

    Recommendations

    • Configure project workspaces in ChatGPT Team to reflect different lab contexts
    • Maintain prompt libraries and reasoning trails
    • Make costs, configurations, and limitations explicit in diary and lab notes
    • Evaluate whether to add AI-enhanced spreadsheet or knowledge tools (e.g. Notion, Obsidian) in future iterations

    Tags

    ai tools, toolkit, configuration, modelling, small business, chatgpt, perplexity, notebooklm, office software, credibility

    Glossary

    ChatGPT Team – OpenAI’s paid workspace version of ChatGPT, allowing collaboration, custom GPTs, and project folders.
    NotebookLM – A Google tool for working with uploaded documents using AI, currently free.
    Perplexity Pro – A subscription AI assistant known for showing sources.
    Vision input – The ability to upload images (photos, scans) and have the AI interpret them.

  • Working Towards a Strategy

    In the last few weeks, we’ve been thinking more clearly about how to describe what Anapoly AI Labs is for and how we intend to run it.

    The idea, from the start, was not to teach AI or to promote it, but to work out what it’s actually good for. Not in theory, but in the real day-to-day work of people like us. We’d do this by setting up simulated work environments (labs) and running real tasks with current AI tools to see what helps, what doesn’t, and what’s worth doing differently.

    To sharpen that thinking, I used ChatGPT as a sounding board. I gave it access to our core documents, including the notes from a deep dive discussion in NotebookLM about what we’re trying to build. Then I asked it to act as a thinking partner and help me write a strategy.

    The result is a good working draft that sets out our purpose, stance, methods, and measures of success. It’s a helpful starting point for discussion. One thing we’ve been clear about from the start: we don’t claim to be AI experts. We’re practitioners, working things out in public. That’s our stance, and the strategy captures it well.

    We’ve published the draft as a PDF. It explains how Anapoly AI Labs will work: how the labs are set up, what kind of people they’re for, how we plan to run sessions, and what success would look like. We now want to shift focus from shaping the idea to working out how to make it happen.

    Download the full document if you’d like to see more. We’d welcome thoughts, questions, or constructive criticism – we’re still working it out.

  • First lab note published

    We’ve just posted our first lab note.

    It documents an internal experiment to refine the custom instructions we use with ChatGPT – what we expect from it, how it should respond, and how to keep it useful across different tasks. The aim is to define a persona for the AI assistant that is more consistent and can adapt to the different types of assistance required of it.

    It’s a good example of how we’re using the Labs: not to explain AI, but to find out what it’s actually good for.

    Read the lab note → Custom Instructions for ChatGPT