Experiment 01 · Simulations
A civil dispute, run end to end, by agents.
A statement of claim, a defence, an evidence bundle and a hearing. The judicial officer, the registrar, counsel and the parties are AI agents. The hearing produces directions, findings and a determination, so the process itself can be studied, tested and improved.
- IntakeCase overview, pleadings, evidence and precedent assembled into a hearing intake pack.
- HearingAllocation to a bench, opening, examination of the evidence, submissions, determination.
- AssessmentEvery hearing is scored against a rubric and fed back into the next build.
Experiment 02 · Legal research
Research with its sources on the page.
A question of law is answered from the material: statutes, cases, commentary and the matter's own documents, structured into one map per matter. Every finding shows what it rests on and how sure the model is, so a practitioner can check it, challenge it and reuse it.
- SourcesStatutes, cases, commentary and the matter's documents, linked to each other, not piled in a folder.
- ConfidenceEach finding states how sure it is and why; a low number is an answer too.
- ReuseWhat resolved in one matter sharpens the next question, tenant by tenant.
Experiments 03 onward · Open
The platform is open. Bring the next one.
The experiments share one method: name the process, build it on real infrastructure, run it with real people or agents, publish the record, and say plainly what is real and what is not. Anything in law that can be rehearsed, researched or measured is a candidate.
- You bringA process worth studying, its documents, and the people or agents who play the parts.
- We bringTasks, boards, agents, the bench, the research map and the published record.
- We publishThe record, the rubric and the results, under the same terms as everything here.