Product · Intent Algebra
See what Spotonix thinks you mean before it queries your data.
Intent Algebra is the mechanism that represents selected definitions, calculations, scope, filters, grain, and material ambiguity as a visible analytical plan.
The product moment
Read the plan before you inspect the result.
The interpretation panel and each plan row keep their origin visible so team meaning, model structure, and system assembly do not collapse into one anonymous claim.
Which stores are losing habitual customers this quarter?
Interpretation
habitual customers
Customers who purchased in at least three of the previous six months.
Defined by your teamAnalytical plan
- Segment
- Habitual customersDefined by your team
- Change rule
- Customer count down vs prior quarterAssembled by Spotonix
- Group by
- StoreFound in your model
- Comparison
- This quarter vs previous quarterDefined inline
- Grain
- Store × quarterAssembled by Spotonix
Read the interpretation and plan. Missing meaning is visible before the analysis runs.
Inspect the basis of the result. The answer does not have to hide behind a chat response.
The mechanism
Bind the meaning. Close the fork. Represent the analysis.
These are analytical responsibilities, not a hidden chain-of-thought display. The public artifact is the plan people can inspect.
01
Bind
Connect the words to explicit concepts.
A business term can resolve to a team-supplied definition, supported model structure, workspace context, or a definition supplied inline for the question.
02
Close
Expose material ambiguity before execution.
If unresolved meaning can change the population, calculation, scope, comparison, or grain, the system can ask instead of hiding the choice in generated logic.
03
Represent
Make the analytical shape inspectable.
The plan gives requesters and reviewers a shared representation to read before following the generated logic, sources, and result artifacts.
Claims boundary
A visible plan makes the system inspectable—not infallible.
Interpretation can be wrong
Visibility creates a review point, not a correctness guarantee.
The person responsible for the question still needs to inspect important concepts, assumptions, and evidence for the workflow.
Not a query compiler
The same plan does not promise identical SQL.
Generated queries may differ. Evaluate whether material concepts and bindings carry through, and whether the result basis can be inspected.
Asking is selective
Not every possible ambiguity becomes a question.
The useful test is whether material unresolved company meaning is surfaced in representative workflows—not whether the system asks about every assumption.
Continue the technical path
See where context comes from and what supports the answer.
Context
Context Graph
The explicit company and analytical context available to interpretation.
Workflow
How it works
The end-to-end path from question and clarification to plan, execution, and evidence.
Evaluation
Evidence
The two-path comparison, 10 ambiguous questions, and the evidence standard for a Two-week Pilot.
Evaluate directly
Bring questions where one phrase can change the analysis.
A useful proof includes contested metrics, incomplete requests, multiple valid definitions, and cases where a reviewer should reject or correct the interpretation.
Book DemoSee how it works