How the Panaversity team works

Panaversity, the team behind this book, uses both apps every day for its own work. Here is how we use them. You do not need to copy it on day one, but it shows the ideas on this page at work.

Everyone on the Panaversity team has a paid plan for both Claude and ChatGPT.¹ Our default place to work is the Claude desktop app. We use ChatGPT for one main job: to review what Claude made.

We move work in and out of the apps as zip files. A zip file packs many files and folders into one file, and keeps each file in its folder. To give Claude or ChatGPT a whole project at once, such as a chapter with its images and data, we upload one zip. When the work is done, we ask for the result as one zip to download, so every file comes back in the right folder, ready to use. This also suits the borrowed computer described above: one zip is an easy way to bring all the work back as saved files.

Our method is simple: set a goal, 9.5 out of 10 in each area, then improve the work in rounds. When we write a book chapter, a blog post or an article, it goes like this:

1. Claude writes a first draft.
2. Claude reviews the draft and grades it out of 10 in three areas: accuracy, quality, and how easy it is for a beginner to understand.
3. Claude improves the draft until it reaches 9.5 in each area. It improves, grades again and repeats. Claude now does these rounds by itself. Before, we had to ask for each round by hand.
4. We give the result and its sources to ChatGPT and ask it to review and grade the work too, with specific fixes.
5. We give ChatGPT's review back to Claude, which uses it to improve the work again.
6. A person checks the facts against their sources, reviews any problems still open, and decides when the work is ready.

Why ask a second AI? Grading your own work is hard, for people and for AI. ChatGPT comes from a different company and was trained differently, so it often notices problems that Claude missed.

The grades are a guide, not proof. A 9.5 does not show that every fact is right. That is why a person checks the facts and makes the final call. The 9.5 goal works like a done-when, and the person at the end is the check.

If you try this yourself, two habits keep the rounds honest. Say what each grade means, for example that accuracy means every fact can be found in the sources. And limit the rounds, to three for example, and ask Claude to report any problem it could not fix. Then Claude improves the work, not just the score.