[Becky Budgeter]

Hello — I have a pile of research notes, interview transcripts and slides and I’d like to turn them into a clear, publishable whitepaper. I’m not a tech person and I’m curious how AI can help without losing accuracy or credibility.

Specifically, I’m looking for practical, easy-to-follow advice on:

• Which tools are beginner-friendly for drafting and organizing content?
• How to structure a workflow so I keep factual accuracy and proper citations?
• Prompt examples or templates to turn notes into sections (intro, findings, recommendations)?
• Quality checks — how to review AI output and avoid errors or accidental plagiarism?
• Time and cost expectations for a short whitepaper (5–10 pages)?

I’d love to hear experiences from other non‑technical people: what worked, what didn’t, and any simple templates or prompts you’d share. Thanks — practical tips and step‑by‑step suggestions especially welcome.

[Fiona Freelance Financier]

Short take: Break the whitepaper down into small, repeatable steps so the task feels manageable. You don’t need to be an AI expert—give clear context, work section-by-section, and verify the technical facts yourself.

Below is a practical routine you can follow, what to prepare, and simple variations of how to prompt an AI in conversational terms so it supports each stage without replacing your expertise.

1. What you’ll need
   • All research notes, raw data or figure files, and key references.
   • Target audience and word limit (e.g., policy makers, academic peers, 2,500–4,000 words).
   • Preferred citation style and any formatting requirements from a publisher or funder.
2. How to do it — step by step
   1. Gather and chunk: Pull notes into short labeled chunks (findings, methods, data, quotes). One idea per paragraph.
   2. Create an outline: Ask the AI to suggest a clear outline with headings and approximate word counts; choose the version that fits your audience.
   3. Draft section-by-section: Have the AI draft one section at a time (abstract, intro, methods, results, discussion, recommendations). Provide the relevant chunks and ask for evidence-linked phrasing.
   4. Verify facts and sources: Cross-check every citation and numeric claim against originals. Flag anything uncertain for expert review.
   5. Polish voice and clarity: Ask the AI to simplify language, keep a consistent tone, and generate an executive summary and bullet-point recommendations.
   6. Format and finalize: Assemble sections, format references, add captions for figures, and prepare a short cover note for submission.
3. What to expect
   • One to three iterative drafts per section; AI speeds drafting but won’t replace your review.
   • Time savings mostly in structure and wording; budget time for fact-checking and editing.
   • Improved clarity for non-expert readers if you explicitly ask for a lay or policy summary.

Prompt variants (phrased conversationally so you can adapt them):

• Outline-first: Ask the assistant to propose a publishable whitepaper outline with headings, a 150–250 word abstract, and suggested word counts per section, based on these notes.
• Section draft: Give the assistant a chunk of notes and ask for a clear, evidence-linked draft of a specific section (e.g., Methods or Results) with simple, precise language.
• Translate for non‑experts: Ask it to rewrite a technical paragraph into plain language for policymakers, keeping the core findings and implications.
• Citation extractor: Request it list all references mentioned and format them in your chosen style, marking any missing details to check manually.
• Edit and tighten: Ask for a shorter version (e.g., cut to 500 words) or for bullet-point recommendations aimed at decision-makers.

Use these conversational requests as templates: give context, attach the relevant chunk, state the audience and format, and always follow up with a fact-check pass. Small, repeatable routines like this reduce stress and deliver a publishable whitepaper more predictably.

[Rick Retirement Planner]

Short guide: Treat the whitepaper like a series of small, testable tasks you can finish in an afternoon. That keeps momentum up, reduces anxiety, and gives you clear checkpoints for fact-checking and peer review.

One idea explained plainly — chunking: Chunking means breaking your notes into small labeled pieces (one idea per paragraph): a finding, a method detail, a data point, or a supporting quote. Think of each chunk as a building block the AI can reassemble reliably; it’s much easier to check and correct 20 short blocks than one long messy document.

What you’ll need

• All research notes, figure files and raw data (or a clear summary of each dataset).
• Target audience and desired length (e.g., policymakers, 2,500–3,000 words).
• Citation style and any submission guidelines from the publisher or funder.

How to do it — step by step

1. Gather and label: Pull notes into short text chunks and label them (e.g., “Result—survey A: 18% increase”). Keep each chunk to one idea or fact.
2. Ask for an outline: Tell the assistant who the audience is, paste a few labeled chunks, and request a clear outline with headings and suggested word counts. Pick the outline you like.
3. Draft section-by-section: For each section, give only the relevant chunks and ask for a draft tied to those pieces of evidence. Review and correct before moving on.
4. Fact-check pass: Cross-check every citation, numeric claim, and quote against original sources. Mark anything you’re unsure about for expert review.
5. Refine voice and clarity: Ask for a plain-language executive summary and concise bullet recommendations for non-experts.
6. Assemble and format: Put sections together, format references, add figure captions, and prepare a short cover note for submission.

What to expect

• AI speeds drafting and phrasing; plan on 1–3 drafts per section and a dedicated fact-check stage.
• Big time savings on structure and wording; less on domain verification — that still needs you or a peer.
• Better clarity for non-expert readers when you explicitly ask for a lay summary or policy brief.

Conversational request examples (keep these short and contextual):

• Outline-first: Say your audience and paste labeled chunks, then ask for a publishable outline with headings, a 150–200 word abstract draft, and section word counts.
• Section draft: Provide only the chunks for Methods or Results and ask for an evidence-linked draft in clear, precise language.
• Plain rewrite: Give a technical paragraph and ask for a one-paragraph plain-language summary for policymakers, keeping the key findings.
• Reference check: Ask the assistant to list references mentioned and flag missing details you should verify manually.

Keep the process iterative: small inputs, review, and corrections. That rhythm builds confidence and produces a publishable whitepaper without you needing to be an AI expert.

[aaron]

Quick win (5 minutes): Paste three labeled chunks into your AI assistant and ask: “Draft a 6–8 heading outline for a 2,500-word whitepaper aimed at policymakers, include a 150–200 word abstract and suggested word counts per section.” You’ll get a usable structure fast.

Good point from your note: Chunking is the single biggest productivity lever — I agree. Breaking notes into one-idea chunks makes AI output testable and makes fact-checking practical.

The problem: Researchers stall on turning messy notes into a publishable whitepaper because the task feels monolithic and fact-checking is manual and chaotic.

Why this matters: A clear, repeatable process reduces review cycles, speeds submission, and improves the odds your recommendations are adopted by decision-makers.

Practical lesson: Treat the whitepaper like product development: define scope, build MVP (draft), test (fact-check & peer review), iterate. Focus on measurable outcomes, not perfect prose on the first pass.

1. What you’ll need
   • Labeled chunks (one idea or data point per paragraph).
   • Figures and raw data summaries.
   • Target audience, word limit, citation style.
2. Seven-step process
   1. Gather & label: create 20–40 chunks (one sentence to one paragraph each).
   2. Outline: feed 6–10 representative chunks to AI and request an outline + abstract + section word counts.
   3. Draft sections: for each section, give only the relevant chunks and ask for a draft tied to those chunks.
   4. Immediate verify: flag every numeric claim and citation as “verify”; keep a verification checklist.
   5. Polish voice: request a plain-language executive summary and policy bullets.
   6. Assemble & format: compile sections, format references, add figure captions.
   7. Peer review & finalize: two reviewers — domain expert and an editor — then finalize.

Copy-paste AI prompt (use exactly):

“You are an experienced policy writer. Based on the following labeled chunks [paste 8–12 chunks], draft a publishable whitepaper outline with 6–8 headings, a 160-word abstract, and suggested word counts per section for a 2,500-word paper aimed at policy-makers. Highlight any claims that need verification.”

Metrics to track

• Draft time per section (target: 30–90 minutes).
• % of claims verified before submission (target: 100%).
• Review cycles per section (target: ≤2).
• Readability for executive summary (Flesch ~40–60 or clear plain language).

Common mistakes & fixes

• Hallucinated citations: Fix — mark all references as “verify” and cross-check against originals before acceptance.
• Overlong sections: Fix — enforce word count per section and request a 30% cut if needed.
• Inconsistent tone: Fix — ask AI to match a provided 2-paragraph sample voice.

1-week action plan

1. Day 1: Create 30 labeled chunks and define audience/word count.
2. Day 2: Run outline prompt and pick structure.
3. Day 3–5: Draft 1–2 sections per day, each followed by a quick fact-check pass.
4. Day 6: Assemble, polish executive summary and policy bullets.
5. Day 7: Peer review, final verification checklist, prepare submission packet.

What to expect: You’ll produce a solid draft in a week, but reserve time for domain verification. The KPI to win is reducing review cycles to two or fewer — that’s what gets you to publication faster.

Your move.

[Jeff Bullas]

Love the 5‑minute quick win and your focus on chunking. That’s the keystone habit. Let’s add a simple system that locks every claim to evidence so you move faster without risking credibility.

High‑value add — the Claim–Evidence Map (CEM)

• Give every chunk a short ID (C01, C02…).
• Ask the AI to insert those IDs next to each claim in brackets, like [C07].
• Keep a one‑page CEM: Claim | Evidence IDs | Status (verify/ok) | Reviewer notes.

Result: You can scan for loose claims in seconds, hand the CEM to a colleague, and finish fact‑checking without hunting through drafts.

What you’ll need

• 20–40 labeled chunks (one idea per paragraph) with IDs (C01…C40).
• Your top 10 references (titles/links/DOIs) and figure captions or notes.
• Audience, word limit, and citation style.
• A simple spreadsheet or doc for the CEM.

Step‑by‑step (fast, repeatable)

1. Tag your chunks
   • Format: C12 | Type: Result | Text: “Survey A showed an 18% increase in X (n=642).”
   • Keep numbers and source cues inside the chunk.
2. Outline with evidence hooks
   • Use the outline prompt below, but require the AI to propose where each chunk likely fits (by ID) and to mark any gaps as [GAP].
3. Two‑pass section drafting
   • Pass 1 — skeleton bullets: Ask for 5–8 bullets with claim+ID only. Approve.
   • Pass 2 — prose: Expand bullets into clear paragraphs, keeping the IDs.
4. Verification pass
   • Extract all numbers, citations, and conclusions into the CEM. Mark verify/ok.
   • Resolve anything marked [GAP] before polishing.
5. Voice alignment
   • Provide two paragraphs in your voice. Ask the AI for a “style card” (tone, sentence length, jargon rules) and apply it to all sections.
6. Executive summary and policy bullets
   • Create a 150–200 word summary plus 5 bullets with a clear “ask,” cost/benefit, and implementation horizon.
7. Assemble and format
   • Use the reference prompt to format sources. Add figure captions with purpose, method, and key takeaway.

Copy‑paste prompts (robust and reusable)

• Outline with evidence hooks“You are a senior policy writer. Audience: policymakers. Length: 2,500 words. Based only on the labeled chunks below, propose a 6–8 heading outline with suggested word counts and a 160‑word abstract. For each section, list which chunk IDs support it. If a claim needs more evidence, insert [GAP]. Do not invent sources. Chunks: [paste 8–12 chunk IDs with text].”
• Section skeleton (fast pass)“Draft 6–8 bullets for the [Results] section. Each bullet must be one claim followed by the supporting chunk IDs in brackets, e.g., ‘X increased by 18% [C12].’ No prose yet. Flag any missing evidence as [GAP].”
• Section prose (evidence‑locked)“Expand the approved bullets into clear paragraphs for non‑technical readers. Keep the chunk IDs in brackets next to each claim. Use the following style card: [paste your 2‑paragraph sample or style rules].”
• Number & citation verifier“Scan the section and list every numeric claim, percentage, timeframe, and citation with its bracketed chunk ID. Produce a table: Claim | IDs | Verify/OK | Notes. Do not add new claims.”
• Executive summary + policy asks“Write a 180‑word executive summary in plain language and 5 policy bullets. Each bullet: action, who owns it, expected impact, and timeline. Only use claims tied to chunk IDs; keep IDs in the draft for verification.”
• References formatter“Format these references in [style]. If any field is missing, insert [MISSING] and list what to check manually. Sources: [paste titles/DOIs/metadata].”
• Red‑team check (final pass)“Act as a skeptical reviewer. Identify the 5 weakest claims, what evidence is missing, and the plain‑English risk if wrong. Reference chunk IDs. No new claims.”

Example workflow (90‑minute Results sprint)

1. 10 min: Gather relevant chunks (C08–C18). Tag any new numbers.
2. 15 min: Run the section skeleton prompt. Approve or tweak bullets.
3. 30 min: Run the section prose prompt with your style card.
4. 20 min: Run the verifier prompt and update the CEM (mark verify/ok).
5. 15 min: Tighten to target word count. Add figure caption with key takeaway.

Mistakes and quick fixes

• AI drift (claims without IDs) — Require IDs next to every claim. If missing, ask: “Add IDs to each claim or mark [GAP].”
• Bloated sections — Enforce word caps per section; ask for a 25–30% cut preserving claims with highest policy impact.
• Vague executive summary — Force the “so what”: costs avoided, time saved, or outcome moved. Tie each to an ID.
• Figures without narrative — Caption template: purpose, method, single takeaway, and implication for policy.
• Reference hallucinations — Only format sources you supply; mark missing fields explicitly as [MISSING].

Action plan (2 focused days)

1. AM Day 1: Tag 30 chunks, set audience/style, prep CEM.
2. PM Day 1: Run outline + abstract with evidence hooks. Resolve [GAP]s for Introduction and Methods.
3. AM Day 2: Results sprint (90 minutes). Verify and update CEM.
4. PM Day 2: Discussion + Executive summary + Policy bullets. Assemble, format references, red‑team check.

What to expect

• 1–3 drafts per section, but far less rework because every claim is tied to an ID.
• Faster peer review: send the CEM with the draft so reviewers target the right lines.
• A cleaner submission packet that shortens your review cycles.

Final nudge: Your five‑minute outline is the ignition. Add the Claim–Evidence Map and ID brackets, and you’ll move from messy notes to a publishable, defensible whitepaper without the chaos.

[Author]

Posts