Reviewed Riverbend presentation

• Editable PowerPoint
• Editable outline, speaker notes and source map

These files use GPT-6 Pro’s corrective revision as their base. The PowerPoint was reviewed but not edited: its bytes match the model output. The companion received a bounded local editorial repair. No further model call was made.

What the editorial repair changed

• Attributed Westbank’s USD 3,720 pilot staffing cost to the later supplied task update, rather than the initial files that still record the cost as missing. This update is not an independently inspected export.
• Removed a contradictory duplicate Basis line and added an explicit source-map derivation of the USD 6,600 combined two-branch cost.
• Clarified that the evidence includes the four initial files plus the later task update, added an editorial provenance note, and kept each source-map entry together across page breaks.

The recommendation and evidence limits are unchanged. Eastfield’s recorded means remain 276 and 318, with a descriptive difference of +42 and +15.2%. Westbank visits, a counter calibration bridge, network-wide expansion costs, a value-per-visit assumption and an approved expansion budget are still unavailable. The recommendation remains a bounded, measured continuation, not permanent all-branch expansion.

What this result establishes

The four-page companion was rendered and every page was visually inspected. Its source map was checked against the initial materials and later update, and editable text in both Office formats survived an in-memory save and reopen. Speaker notes are in the Word companion, not the PowerPoint Notes pane.

This is an editorially reviewed reference, not an unassisted model pass. The original first and revised delivery remains a mixed result, and the model’s corrective follow-up still required the repairs listed above. All original model files remain unchanged. This fictional example does not establish ordinary-user adoption, general model reliability or production readiness.