Rixx
From search to publishable research - in one workflow
109 followers
From search to publishable research - in one workflow
109 followers
Most tools solve one part of thinking. Search gives links, AI gives answers, and creation needs separate tools.
Rixx brings it all into one workflow. Search like Google, ask follow-ups, analyze files, generate visuals, and turn research into blogs or reports.
Instead of switching between tools, Rixx helps you think, explore, and create in one place.
This is the 2nd launch from Rixx. View more
Rixx
Launching today
AI search engines lie. Rixx doesn't.
Search the web and get answers backed by real citations so you can verify every claim, not just trust it.
→ See data visually with charts and graphs
→ See images inline with your results
→ Upload PDFs, docs, and links as context
→ Multimodal search: text, images, docs together
→ Organize research into Insights folders
Stop guessing. Start knowing.
Free Options
Launch Team / Built With
Rixx
How exhaustive is the search? Does it cap the number of web searches and pages visited, or does it go until it hits a goal of credibility? Also, can it handle JS-rendered pages, PDFs and Images? I ask because I've built my own internal method that does this but would love to not have to manage it and none of the stock research tools are cost-effective, including Parallel AI's Find All or Deep Research (let alone Perplexity or stock Claude)
Rixx
@peter_neyra Great questions. Yes, handles JS-rendered pages, PDFs, images, and more natively. For depth it runs multi-search in parallel, so it hits credible coverage fast. There's a cap but because it searches multiple sources simultaneously it extracts far more signal than single-thread tools in the same timeframe. Deep Research mode is actively in development that's where the real exhaustive crawling comes in.
Congrats, Rixx feels useful if it can keep that whole chain together instead of creating another tab in the research mess. How do you handle source quality when generating cited answers?
Rixx
@dmitrii_volosatov That’s a big part of what we’re focused on. We rank and compare sources internally instead of treating every citation equally, so weaker sources don’t end up driving the final answer.
The goal is to keep the research chain reliable from search → reasoning → output.
The “from search to publishable research” promise is the interesting part. Citations are necessary, but for writing/research workflows the bigger trust question is usually claim shape: did the AI preserve what the source actually says, or did it turn a narrow source into a broad conclusion?
One feature I’d love is a claim table before publishing: claim, supporting sources, source strength, and any caveat/contradiction Rixx found. That would make the final blog/report feel less like a generated answer with links and more like research you can safely stand behind.
Rixx
@jim_jeffers That’s the difficult part tbh. Anyone can attach citations, but keeping the actual meaning of the sources intact is what matters more.
And the claim table suggestion is genuinely interesting that kind of transparency would fit Rixx really well.
@hitendraa Exactly. The hard UI part is probably deciding when not to interrupt the writing flow.
Maybe the claim table does not need to be visible all the time; it could appear when a claim is broad, controversial, weakly sourced, or stitched from multiple sources. That way the user gets transparency where the risk is highest, without turning every simple paragraph into compliance work.
Rixx
@jim_jeffers Yeah this feels like the right balance honestly. If it’s always visible people will just tune it out, but surfacing it only when something feels weak, broad, or stitched together could actually build trust instead of adding noise.
Really interesting idea