OpenProof
Application example →The product and document review workflow in development. Decisions remain human.
OPENPROOF LEGAL · LEGAL PROFESSIONALS
A case that can be verified.
A report that can be handed over.
Scattered documents. OpenProof organises the evidence, links each finding to its source, preserves contradictions and reservations, then submits the result to human review.
View a reconstructed case ↗Explore the Investigation module — 15 min →
Fictional example without an account · prewritten observations · product in development
GREYC · UNIVERSITÉ DE CAEN NORMANDIEResearch collaboration since 2025 · continuing in 2026Meet the team ↗
TRUTHX · THE TECHNOLOGY IN CONTEXT
One project, clear roles.
TruthX Engine
The structuring and control engine. Multi-agent research will be connected progressively, with results that can be evaluated.
RPO
The public structured record format and its integrity check. A fingerprint checks for changes, not the truth of the content.
Read the documentation →TruthX analysis & Proof Briefs →
01 / THE PROBLEM TO SOLVE
Be able to show why.
For people examining complex cases: operations, audit, compliance, research and legal document review. Our first collaborative workstream is preparing a case for human review.
Which source supports this?
Find the original passage, so a summary can be checked against its sources.
What does not add up?
Keep competing versions, disagreements and missing documents visible until reviewed.
What can I hand over?
Prepare a case where the next reader can recover sources, reservations and review decisions.
The conflict remains complex. The record becomes readable.
02 / SOMETHING YOU CAN EXAMINE
They had built the business together.
Now two founders blame the third for spending, lost customers and disruption. His role, shares, reputation and personal finances are at stake. How can he respond without losing the facts in the conflict?
Examine collective decisions, individual shortcomings and what remains uncertain. Each finding links to a fictional excerpt you can read.
Ready to examineFive allegations, eight fictional excerpts, a timeline and open questions.
Educational examplePrewritten findings, without demonstrating automatic contradiction detection. Decisions remain human.
03 / PLANS & PRICING
Explore. Then choose your use.
Explore the public example, planned software uses and access conditions. The per-case, monthly and annual comparison is available without an account; purchases and subscriptions are not open yet.
View the plans →LET’S TALK ABOUT YOUR NEED
Contact Gersende.
A question, a research contribution or a partnership project? Tell us your objective and the next step you would like.
gersende.ryard.de.parcey@truthx.coDescribe your need without attaching documents or sharing confidential information.
04 / A FOUNDER. A RESEARCH FOUNDATION. A NEXT CHAPTER.
The work has already begun.
Conceived and led by Gersende.
TruthX founder and OpenProof product designer, Gersende connects her transformation experience to an operational question: how can we reconstruct what supports a decision? She designed the initial thirteen-module architecture and leads priorities, contributions and acceptance.
Gersende’s background and commitment →GREYC / UNIVERSITÉ DE CAEN NORMANDIE · 2025–2026
Professor Gaël Dias · Lucy Martin · Clément Correia-Peltier
Under Professor Gaël Dias’s academic supervision, Lucy Martin and Clément Correia-Peltier developed a multi-agent prototype and delivered their code, report and presentation in May 2026. Their work covers document extraction, consistency checks, structured analysis and report generation.
This prototype is a research foundation. Integration into the current engine still needs to be implemented and evaluated.
Research and contributions ↗05 / THE OPENPROOF COMMUNITY
Make room for facts.
Build together.
A case can cite its sources and still leave part of the story out. In our fictional example, three cofounders fall out: shared decisions, disputed spending and conflicting evidence must remain open to review.
Choose one claim. Find what supports it, what challenges it and what is still missing. Your perspective can help improve the method and the readability of the report. No coding is needed for a first review.
You are testing one OpenProof module: the Investigation workspace and its interactive map. Fictional case, no payment; no private case is opened.
- MODULE · InvestigationActors, events, sources, timeline and questions — this is what you test here.
- STAGE 1 · UnderstandReconstruct what is requested, alleged and already documented.
- STAGE 2 · DeepenContradictions, causality, harm, sources and competing hypotheses.
- STAGE 3 · Prepare human choicesClarify options with counsel; the decision remains human.
- OUTPUT · RPOStructured, versioned and verifiable output — not a fourth reasoning stage.
The general form remains available without a GitHub account.
View GitHub thread #44 ↗Follow the work with Gersende →Suggested time. Reading is open; a GitHub account is needed to reply. Entirely fictional material, prepared for the demonstration.
15 min · #44
Review one claim ↗
One source passage, one proposed correction and a remaining question.
30 min · #45Find the source ↗
Identify where a reader hesitates and suggest a clearer layout.
45–60 min · #46Describe a check ↗
An example of a valid, invalid or insufficient reference.
Proposals are reviewed in their GitHub thread. Accepted contributions are credited and linked to the resulting changes.
Join the work on GitHub ↗
A GitHub account is needed to reply. Fictional examples only. The complete engine is not yet released under an open-source licence.