A roadmap is a bet about the future, and most roadmaps never get checked against the other public bets. Your category's practitioners — builders, analysts, power users on panels — spend serious airtime forecasting where things go: which capabilities become table stakes, which architectures win, what customers will demand next year. Individually these are opinions; aggregated, they're the market's implied roadmap.

Diverging from that consensus is fine — the best roadmaps often do — but diverging unknowingly is how products wake up behind: building the feature the market considers legacy, skipping the one everyone forecasts as mandatory. The check costs an afternoon. Skipping it costs a repositioning.

deep_query aggregates the forecast: "where do practitioners and analysts say <category> is heading — what becomes table stakes, what declines, what emerges?" — researched across the talks and panels, returned as a cited map of the predicted future: consensus calls, contested calls, and who's making each.

Your roadmap then gets the comparison it never had: where it rhymes with consensus (fine — validate timing), where it diverges (fine — if the divergence is a thesis you can state), and where it's silent on something widely forecast (the dangerous quadrant). The output for the board isn't "we follow the herd"; it's "here's the market's implied roadmap, cited, and here's precisely where and why we differ."