240 synthetic applications for a signal-processing role at a fictional instruments maker in Oulu, screened four ways and checked against an answer key no screening arm could see. A workflow read every application against twelve requirements and returned evidence dossiers with verbatim quotes but no ranking or verdict. It caught 14 of 15 credential inflations and identified 19 of 22 keyword stuffers. Four of ten predictions were met.
At Kaikuvaara in Oulu, Hanna has two hundred and forty applications for one signal-processing role and only one afternoon to get through them. One of the candidates wrote automation and analysis scripts for a particle-physics detector, but the word 'Python' is nowhere in the application. The ATS filter ranked that candidate a hundred and forty-fourth. At number one it put a candidate who matched all twelve requirement keywords with almost nothing real behind them. Reading two hundred and forty applications against twelve requirements takes more time than the hiring team has, so we built a workflow to do it. Recruitment is classified as high-risk under the EU AI Act, which means the workflow produces no ranking and no verdict. It reads each application in full against the twelve requirements and returns a summary of the evidence it found, with verbatim quotes from the CV and cover letter. The recruiter decides. The same applications were screened four ways and checked against the sealed answer key. The workflow found about ninety-seven per cent of the required evidence. It caught fourteen of fifteen candidates whose applications contradicted their own claimed qualifications, things like a degree date that does not match. It flagged nineteen of twenty-two candidates who had packed their application with the right keywords but had no real evidence behind them. The keyword filter has no way to question a claim at all. Eighteen candidates genuinely met the requirements but described their experience in different words. The workflow matched twelve of them to the right requirements. In a separate test, twelve simulated recruiters each screened a subset of the applications twice, once on their own and once with the evidence summary beside the application. The two least strict went from spotting none of the faked claims in the subset to spotting all four. The company, the applicants and every qualification are invented. What the workflow does, reading each application against the requirements and returning evidence with citations, transfers.
If you’d like to see what we could solve for you, write to us at hapax.fi.