Get in Touch
Contact AI Consensus Index
We welcome factual corrections, vendor enquiries, and media requests. Read the guidance below before reaching out — it will help us respond faster and more usefully.
1 What We Accept
We respond to three categories of enquiry. Please identify which applies to your message when you write — it helps us route correctly.
📋
Factual Corrections
A published review contains a demonstrably incorrect statement — wrong pricing, a mischaracterised feature, an outdated compliance status. Include a link to the public documentation that supports the correction. Verified corrections are processed promptly.
🏢
Vendor Enquiries
You represent a reviewed platform and wish to discuss factual accuracy, understand our evaluation process, or establish or terminate an affiliate relationship. Note that commercial engagement does not confer any right to alter published scores or editorial positions.
📰
Media & Research
You are a journalist, analyst, or researcher citing or referencing our index and require methodology clarification, additional context, or a statement. Include your publication name and deadline where relevant.
2 How to Reach Us
Email is the only supported contact channel. We do not maintain social media accounts or a live chat function.
We aim to respond within 10 business days
📅 Monday – Friday, UTC+8
3 What We Do Not Action
To be direct about what will not receive a response:
- Requests to remove a review on commercial grounds or due to vendor disagreement with an editorial verdict.
- Requests to improve a score — scores are AI-generated outputs and cannot be manually adjusted. If a re-evaluation is warranted due to a material product change, we will schedule one through our standard process.
- Unsolicited partnership or advertising proposals — we do not accept paid placements, sponsored rankings, or display advertising.
- General product recommendations — we are a research publication, not a consulting service. Our published reviews and rankings contain the information we are able to share.
On vendor score disputes
If you believe a score is incorrect due to a factual error in the underlying data, provide documented evidence and we will investigate. Disagreement with an AI model's assessment of a subjective dimension — ease of use, value perception, support quality — is not a factual error and will not trigger a re-evaluation. We maintain a record of all score dispute requests.
4 Corrections Policy — Summary
For context on how we handle corrections before you write:
- Minor factual corrections — errors in descriptive text that do not affect dimension scores — are updated with a correction note and date.
- Material factual errors — errors that would likely change one or more dimension scores if corrected — trigger a full re-evaluation under our standard prompt. Both the previous and updated scores are published with an explanation.
- Disputed assessments — where a vendor disagrees with a verdict but cannot point to a factual error — are documented but not actioned as corrections.
Full methodology
Our complete evaluation framework — including prompt structure, model selection rationale, scoring dimensions, and re-evaluation cadence — is documented on the How We Rank page. We encourage vendors and researchers to read it before submitting a correction or dispute.