Review Modes

Two ways to interrogate the literature — pick the one that matches your question.

General Review

The default. Each model produces a current-state literature review of your topic: the key scholars, central works, main positions, and open problems — as they understand the field today.

Best for “what's the state of the debate on X?”
Cross-verification highlights where models independently cite the same sources
Fused output reads like a survey chapter introduction

Concept Evolution

A diachronic mode. Instead of asking “what do people think”, it asks “how did this idea get here” — tracing origins, turning points, schools of interpretation, and where the concept stands now.

Best for genealogy-style questions: “the evolution of 此在/Dasein”
Emphasizes chronology — periods, shifts, and ruptures
Comparison matrix still applies: see which milestones every model names

Which should I pick?

If your question is about positions and evidence, use General Review. If it's about history and development of an idea, use Concept Evolution. When in doubt, run both — they're cheap on budget models and the difference in output structure is instructive.