Review research evidence, experiments and development priorities in a single place
PugID examines Research & Development (R&D) documents held in Google Drive or SharePoint. A team member selects an R&D-specific question. PugID locates the relevant files and delivers a structured result drawn from those documents. The R&D team can then check the result against source files and governed laboratory, product-development, experiment, intellectual-property or portfolio systems before using it in a review or decision.
Review the documentation behind R&D decisions
An R&D review may rely on project charters, experiment logs, laboratory notes, test reports, prototype records, stage-gate packs, study documents, risk registers, collaboration updates and invention disclosures. When these files are scattered across different folders, reviewers must first determine the programme, experiment or prototype, method, date, owner, approval status and version.
PugID operates at that document layer. It applies a chosen R&D question to locate relevant content in connected Google Drive or SharePoint folders and produce a structured result. It does not replace electronic laboratory notebooks, laboratory information management systems, product-lifecycle management, experiment platforms, intellectual-property systems, regulatory repositories, quality systems, portfolio tools or live business intelligence. Governed records and the current system state remain authoritative.
Select the R&D question you need to review
The provided catalogue contains focused questions for portfolios, experiments, prototypes, development gates, intellectual property and technical risks.
Go from approved folders to a reviewable result
Connect approved folders.
Link the Google Drive or SharePoint locations holding the documents relevant to the R&D review.
Pick one R&D question.
Select the prompt that fits the programme, experiment, prototype, development stage, method and review window.
Examine the structured result.
Compare it against source documents and governed systems, resolve conflicts and obtain the required scientific, technical, quality, IP, safety or regulatory review before use.
Keep source authority and evidence limits in view
Document analysis can underpin a review, but a summary may leave out experimental context or grow stale as work moves forward. Record the project or study, method, sample or test scope, date, version, owner, approval status and acceptance criteria. Confirm important findings in the authoritative R&D system before acting.
PugID does not run experiments, approve development gates, validate scientific conclusions, determine novelty or patentability, file patents, certify safety, make regulatory decisions or update governed records. If documents conflict, examine their methods, versions, dates, owners and approval status. A structured result is review material, not scientific proof.
Keep source access and data handling within scope
PugID states that connections are encrypted, credentials are not stored, and documents and results are not kept permanently. It further states that temporary analysis data is deleted automatically after eight hours.
Before linking unpublished results, formulations, invention disclosures, prototype records, clinical or field-trial material, partner research or trade secrets, verify folder permissions, contractual terms, IP ownership, privacy requirements, processing details and internal policies. Use approved, minimised test data. Do not put passwords, API keys, private keys, tokens or other secrets in connected documents.
Run a single bounded R&D review
Start with a controlled task like a prototype status review, experiment-log summary or technical-risk review. Connect only approved folders, define the programme, development stage and date range, compare the result against governed records and record exceptions before expanding the evaluation.