Why I built Fracture Studio

Fracture Studio started with debate. I'd write a case, feel good about it, and then get taken apart in a round by an argument I should have seen coming. The frustrating part was that the weakness was always there in my own writing. I just couldn't see it because I already agreed with myself.

So I wanted a tool that would do to my arguments what a good opponent does, before the round instead of during it. Fracture Studio reads a speech, essay, or debate case and looks for the claim everything else rests on. If that one falls, the whole thing falls, and that's usually where the real weakness is.

It also checks facts against the live web, because a confident wrong number is worse than no number at all. Then it hands back a score, a map of how the claims connect, and an attack tree showing exactly how someone would come after it. The first version only gave a number, and a number with no reason attached is useless, so most of the work went into explaining the why behind the score.

The point isn't the score. The point is reading your own argument the way someone who disagrees with you would, and fixing it while you still can. I run my cases through it before tournaments now, and it still catches things I would have walked straight into.