Fusion & Debate Modes
Two specialized orchestrations for different needs. Fusion synthesizes five perspectives into one answer. Debate pits AIs against each other to stress-test your ideas.
Sequential mode is the default – each AI builds on the previous. But sometimes you need a quick synthesized answer, and sometimes you need to see both sides of an argument. That’s what these modes deliver.
Five perspectives. One synthesized answer.
All five AIs respond simultaneously. A synthesis engine combines them into a single unified response.
How it works
1. You send a message
2. All five AIs process your question in parallel (not sequentially)
3. The synthesis engine reads all five responses
4. You receive one unified answer that captures consensus and flags disagreements
Unlike Sequential mode (where AIs see each other’s responses), Fusion mode AIs work independently. The intelligence combination happens after they respond.
What you receive
- The Fused Response – One comprehensive answer
- Consensus Points – Where all or most AIs agreed
- Divergence Points – Where AIs disagreed (highlighted)
- Source Attribution – Which AI contributed which insight
Quick consensus, not deep exploration
Quick decisions
Need one answer, not five to read. Parallel processing is faster than sequential.
Clear questions
When convergence is likely. Focused questions get focused synthesis.
Team briefings
One shareable answer instead of “here’s what five AIs said.”
Master Documents
Fused responses are already synthesized – ideal for document generation.
Stress-test your ideas with structured argumentation.
AIs take opposing positions and argue their cases. You see the strongest arguments for AND against.
How it works
1. You pose a question, statement, or decision
2. AIs are assigned different positions (for/against, or multiple viewpoints)
3. Each AI argues their assigned position with evidence and logic
4. AIs respond to each other’s arguments (rebuttals)
5. You see the full debate and decide for yourself
The key: AIs argue positions they’re assigned, not necessarily what they’d “naturally” recommend. This ensures you hear the strongest case for each side.
What you receive
- Position statements – Each AI’s initial argument
- Evidence – Data and reasoning supporting each side
- Rebuttals – AIs responding to each other’s points
- Key tensions – Where the fundamental disagreements lie
- Common ground – What both sides agree on
What a debate looks like
“Should we raise our Series A now or wait 6 more months to improve our metrics?”
FOR: Raise Now
Argued by Grok, GPT-5.2
- Market conditions favor AI companies – window may not last
- Current metrics ($45K MRR) already meet Series A benchmarks
- Runway anxiety affects team performance
- Rebuttal: Metrics improvement isn’t guaranteed
AGAINST: Wait 6 Months
Argued by Claude, Perplexity
- $100K+ MRR gets significantly better terms
- 6 months at 15% MoM = $105K MRR
- Potentially 5-8% less founder dilution
- Rebuttal: Metrics-based valuation is more defensible
Common Ground & Key Tension
Both sides agree: Current metrics are fundable, just not optimal. Market conditions are favorable but uncertain.
Key tension: Risk of waiting (market downturn, growth stall) vs. reward of waiting (better terms, less dilution).
Decisions with legitimate trade-offs
“Should we?” decisions
See both sides fully argued before committing. Build or buy? Hire senior or junior? Expand now or consolidate?
Controversial topics
Get balanced perspectives instead of one AI’s default position.
Confirmation bias check
Force yourself to hear the other side. “I’m leaning toward X, change my mind.”
Strategy with trade-offs
Understand what you’re giving up with each option, not just what you’re getting.
When to use which mode
| Scenario | Mode | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Need one answer quickly | Fusion | Parallel + synthesis = fast single answer |
| Making a yes/no decision | Debate | See strongest case for each side |
| Want to see the journey | Sequential | Each AI builds on previous responses |
| Finding weaknesses in your plan | Red Team | Adversarial critique, not balanced debate |
| Sharing with team/stakeholders | Fusion | One synthesized answer to share |
| Preparing for objections | Debate | Know the counter-arguments before they’re raised |
Getting the most from each mode
Fusion Tips
- Use for specific, answerable questions – open-ended exploration works better in Sequential
- If a divergence interests you, switch to Sequential for deeper investigation
- For important decisions, try both: Fusion for quick recommendation, Sequential for validation
Debate Tips
- State your leaning if you have one – counter-arguments become more targeted
- Follow up on the argument that surprises you most
- Don’t treat it as a vote – 3 AIs arguing “for” doesn’t mean it’s right. Evaluate argument quality, not count.
Frequently Asked
How do I switch between modes?
Mode selector in the chat interface. You can switch modes mid-conversation – context carries over.
Which is faster, Fusion or Sequential?
Fusion. Parallel processing means all five AIs work simultaneously, then synthesis adds a few seconds. Sequential waits for each AI to finish before the next starts.
Can I see the individual AI responses in Fusion mode?
The synthesis includes source attribution – you see which AI contributed which insight. But the primary output is the fused response, not five separate cards.
Do AIs in Debate mode actually disagree with each other?
Yes – they’re assigned positions and argue them. An AI assigned “against” will build the strongest case against, even if the model might lean differently in a neutral context. That’s the point: you get the strongest case for each side, not each AI’s default opinion.
The right orchestration for every question.
Quick synthesis when you need it. Structured debate when stakes are high. You decide.