Skip to the Lab
Test any dating claim against the canon

The Love Equations Lab

Bring a claim. See where it fits, where it strains, and what the map is missing.

Paste text or drop a file. The Lab shows which ideas on this site your text touches, where its claims overreach, and what it could not match.

01 · Add your text

Add something to analyze.

The Lab reads text. Paste it directly, or attach files, images, documents, or subtitles—everything is converted to plain text on your device before the analysis starts.

Local by default

A URL alone is not a transcript. If the browser cannot retrieve usable text, the Lab keeps the link and asks you to paste or attach the transcript.

0 words

Long text is split into passages on your device. Speaker names and timestamps are kept when present.

Nothing selected.

Media & companion transcript

Local audio and video can be previewed without upload. Attach subtitles or a transcript so the Lab has text to analyze.

No companion transcript attached.

A media player is not transcription. The Lab analyzes only text it actually extracted or that you supplied.

Ready when you are.

    Add analyzable text to begin.

    02 · Results

    Analysis

    Run the Demo Test or add your own text to fill this page with real results.

    Waiting for text Reading your text Checking claims against the canon Analysis complete Analysis complete, with reading warnings No solid canon matches found No relationship claims found The analysis stopped No text is loaded. Nothing has been analyzed.
    Total words
    Passages
    How your text flowed

    From your text to matched concepts

    Matched Tension Unmatched

    Where the matches landed

    Waiting for results

    Matched topics will appear here.

    Claims matched

    Coverage is the share of relationship claims in your text that found a solid match on this site. If no such claims were detected, coverage does not apply. It is not a truth score—a high number only means your text talks about things this site covers.

    The diagram is the summary. The table below lists every passage.
    The details

    Match table

    Nothing analyzed yet.

    Each detected claim and the canon concept it matched. Column headers sort; the tiles above filter.
    Feedback
    Run an analysis to fill this table.

    Stance

    What your text does with each concept

    No alignment labels yet.

    Evidence tier

    How well-supported the matched concepts are

    No matched evidence tiers yet.

    What the Lab can’t do

    A map is not a verdict.

    Matching is not proof. Word overlap can find a relevant concept on this site; it cannot establish that either side is true.

    Coverage describes your text only. A high matched share means your text talks about things this site covers—not that it represents anyone else.

    Unmatched is useful. It may be noise, a source error, a gap on this site, or a lead worth chasing. The Open Questions view keeps those possibilities separate.

    Irony is read straight. The stance label reads negation, quotation, attribution, and qualification from the sentence itself. It has no way to detect sarcasm, so a passage that mocks an idea by stating it is recorded as stating it. Where a stance label looks backwards, check the tone first.

    Word shapes are approximated too. A short list of technical words stops a term like provider being read in its vendor sense, and that list is compared against the passage by stripping suffixes rather than by knowing English. It reaches too far in places and not far enough in others: paying is treated as payment, while carers is not treated as care. Where a plainly relational sentence is rejected, or a technical one is accepted, the word's shape is the first thing to check.

    Clauses are guessed from punctuation. Deciding who is claiming what, and which words a borrowed term is standing next to, both need to know where one clause ends and the next begins. That boundary is approximated from commas, semicolons and dashes rather than parsed, so coordination without a comma, a negator inside a subordinate clause, an appositive, and a chain of attributions can all put a word in the wrong place. Flagged cases route to the feedback pipeline, where they accumulate as the argument for a real parser.

    Feedback

    Report this match

    What did the Lab get wrong?
    e.g. smv:money:provisioning-signal. Leave empty if you only know it is wrong.
    Pre-filled with the current primary when you flag a wrong match.

    Downloads to this device only. Nothing is uploaded, nothing is stored in this browser, and no fixture changes. The file carries the flagged passage, the analyzer's decision trace for it, and the build that produced them — never the full transcript.