proposition-checking

To verify legal citations, you extract propositions paragraph-by-paragraph, link each to its cited authority, retrieve source text, pinpoint excerpts, and output a proposition-by-proposition support classification with dependency risk.

Citation verification checks whether cited judgments, statutes, or exhibits truly support stated legal or factual propositions. The mechanism extracts claims, matches them to user-supplied source text, and grades support levels including contradicted or quote-inaccurate findings.

Detect hallucination and unsupported quotes by applying quote accuracy checks to your litigation drafts. The process maps direct quotations to record references like transcripts or pleadings, classifying any mismatched text as quote-inaccurate or unsupported.

Yes, you can use proposition-checking for evidence summaries and record review. The task applies to litigation drafts where propositions depend on citations such as exhibits, transcripts, pleadings, or correspondence, pinpointing relevant excerpts to grade support.

Identify dependency risk by generating a summary that flags which legal arguments rely on unsupported, partially-supported, or contradicted propositions. This traceability allows you to escalate vulnerable arguments for lawyer review.

When source text is missing during citation verification, the support classification outputs an unverified status for that specific proposition. This constraint ensures you know exactly which cited authority requires further manual retrieval to confirm quote accuracy.