AI Use
How ReLoop.me uses AI.
01Which AI we use
ReLoop.me reports are generated using large language models provided by Anthropic (Claude), accessed through their commercial API. The pipeline that orchestrates the read runs on n8n, hosted in the EU. Full processor details, including where data is stored and for how long, are in our Privacy Policy.
We are not building or training our own models. We are building the framework the model is made to follow — the vocabulary, the evidence rules, the checks, and the refusals.
02What the AI actually does
A report is not one question asked of a chatbot. It is a sequence of constrained passes, each doing one job:
- Extraction — what does the document actually say? Roles, scope, evidence, claims.
- Calibration — against a fixed, closed vocabulary. The model cannot invent a new capability band or a new archetype; it can only choose from a defined set. This is deliberate: it makes reads comparable, and it makes them arguable.
- Attribution — every finding must point to the evidence it rests on. A claim without evidence is flagged as a claim, not promoted to a fact.
- Independent judgement — inflation and claim calibration are assessed by a separate pass that does not see, and cannot revise, its own earlier output. A grader that marks its own work is not a grader.
- Quality control — an automated check runs before delivery, catching structural failures, missing sections, and internal contradictions.
03What the AI never does
- It never decides anything about you, or about anyone.
- It never screens, ranks, scores, filters, or sorts people. ReLoop.me produces no ordered lists and no match scores against a shortlist. Ordering is what turns a reading into a filter.
- It never learns from your material. Your CV, your professional history, and your job descriptions are not used to train any model — ours or anyone else's. They are used to generate your report, and then deleted on the schedule in our Privacy Policy.
- It never reaches a conclusion it cannot support. Where the material is thin, ReLoop.me returns a compact read of what's actually there rather than inventing signal to fill the page.
04Where the human sits
The calibration is human. The framework — what counts as evidence, what a capability band means, where the line for inflation sits, what the system is not allowed to conclude — is written, reviewed, and corrected by a person. When a read comes back wrong, the correction is logged back into the framework, not patched into that one report.
What that means for you: a ReLoop.me report is not a solely automated decision within the meaning of Article 22 GDPR. It produces no decision at all. It produces a reading, addressed to you, that you are free to reject.
05ReLoop.me under the EU AI Act
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — the AI Act — classifies AI systems by their intended purpose. This section states ours, plainly, because a declared purpose is the thing a classification rests on.
Our position
ReLoop.me is not a recruitment or candidate-selection AI system under Annex III, point 4(a) of the AI Act. It is not intended to be used, and is not sold, for placing targeted job advertisements, for analysing or filtering job applications, or for evaluating candidates on an employer's behalf.
Concretely, and enforced as a product boundary rather than a promise:
| Product | What it reads | Who buys it |
|---|---|---|
| Profile Intel | A person's own CV or professional history | The individual, about themselves. No employer channel exists — no volume, no bulk, no API, no shortlist mode. The Terms prohibit using it to assess another person, and the report carries no score, ranking, or comparison to a role, so it cannot screen anyone. |
| Role Intel | A job description — a document, not a person | Anyone, including hiring teams. It analyses no candidate. |
There is no product in which an employer buys an analysis of a candidate. That is not a gap in our roadmap; it is the boundary the platform is built around, and it is why an independent read carries weight that an in-house screening tool cannot.
Transparency (Article 50)
Article 50 of the AI Act requires people to be told when they are interacting with an AI system and when content has been generated by AI. These obligations apply from 2 August 2026 and were not postponed by the Digital Omnibus. ReLoop.me states AI generation on this page, in the report itself, and in the email that delivers it. Machine-readable marking of AI-generated content (Article 50(2)) applies from 2 December 2026, and is being implemented in the report format.
If that ever changes
If ReLoop.me ever builds a product in which a role and a person are compared for an employer, that system would fall under Annex III, and we would build and register it as a compliant high-risk AI system — with risk management, technical documentation, human-oversight design, retained logs, and bias monitoring — before it is placed on the market. Annex III obligations apply from 2 December 2027. We will not ship such a product first and classify it afterwards.
06What AI gets wrong — and what we do about it
Language models are probabilistic. They are confident when they should hesitate, and they are only as good as the material they are given. ReLoop.me is designed around those failure modes rather than pretending they don't exist:
- Thin material produces a thin read. A two-line CV cannot produce a rich capability map, and we will not fabricate one. You get a compact report.
- A confident sentence is not evidence. Claims are separated from what supports them, and the gap between the two is itself part of the report.
- Errors happen. If your report contains something you believe is factually wrong, write to hello@reloop.me. We will look at it, and if the framework got it wrong, we will fix the framework.
ReLoop.me is in public beta. The reads are calibrated, not infallible, and we would rather tell you that here than have you discover it later.
07Your rights
You can ask us what a finding rests on, and we will tell you. You can ask us to remove your report — see Terms, section 10; we action removals within 48 hours. You can exercise every right the GDPR gives you over your data, as set out in our Privacy Policy.
And you can disagree with your report. A read is an argument, not a verdict. The whole point of making the evidence visible is so that you can contest the conclusion drawn from it.
08Contact
Questions about how ReLoop.me uses AI, how a finding was reached, or anything on this page: hello@reloop.me.
Calibrated, not confident. Evidence, not verdict.