Chronologix extracts dated candidate events from litigation documents, preserves document and page provenance, identifies document perspective, and surfaces review signals such as low-confidence entries, likely artifacts, corroborated dates, and possible inconsistencies before attorney review.
Stop retyping bookmarked facts into chronology tables. Keep events, source pages, and review notes together in one structured draft you can hand off cleanly.
Review the case story faster. Every candidate event links back to the document and page that supports it, so you can verify a fact in seconds instead of digging.
Chronologix keeps each candidate event tied to the source document, page, and original text so reviewers can verify before relying on it.
Current demo is an early review-oriented prototype. It surfaces candidate review signals, not legal conclusions.
Below is a demo review view from the Gipson public case packet. Candidate events are grouped into review groups and labeled as corroborated, single-perspective, low-confidence, likely artifact, or possible conflict. Select a group to inspect the original event sentences, source document, page number, and perspective behind the review signal.
Review groups are cautious signals, not legal conclusions. A reviewer should inspect the linked source pages before relying on any grouping.
Chronologix treats chronology entries as reviewable case facts, not just dates on a timeline. Each candidate event keeps the source document, page number, perspective, original text, and review signal so litigation teams can verify the record before relying on it.
We're collecting early feedback from litigation reviewers to refine the parts that matter most before expanding beyond the public-case demo.
Later: client chronology comparison, dense timeline handling, bookmark / highlight extraction, and deeper conflict grouping.
We're collecting feedback from litigation professionals to validate Chronologix on real chronology workflows. A walkthrough takes about 20 minutes.