Documentation Index
Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://mareforma.mintlify.app/llms.txt
Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
The problem
AI scientists are being deployed on real research problems — including drug targets, clinical hypotheses, and materials discovery — before any infrastructure exists to answer a basic question: which of their findings can be trusted? The problem is not that AI scientists get things wrong. Every scientist gets things wrong. The problem is that the current generation of agent systems provides no principled way to distinguish:- a finding backed by data from one backed by LLM prior knowledge
- genuine independent replication from two agents repeating each other
- an established consensus from a single speculative assertion
What other tools address
Tracing and observability tools record what the agent did: which tools were called, what was returned, how long it took. This is useful for debugging. It is not epistemic infrastructure. Knowing that an agent called a retrieval tool does not tell you whether the retrieved finding was independently replicated or whether the data pipeline actually ran. Structured outputs and validation schemas catch format errors. They do not catch epistemic errors: a correctly structured claim can still be wrong, ungrounded, or a duplicate of something already known. Vector stores and retrieval give agents access to prior knowledge. They do not record which of that knowledge has been independently validated, which is contested, or which paths the current claim was derived from.What Mareforma does differently
Mareforma is not an observability tool. It does not record execution traces. It records epistemic objects (claims with provenance) and derives trust from the structure of the graph, not from the agents that populate it. Trust from topology, not introspection. Two independent agents reaching the same conclusion through different data paths is a stronger signal than one agent reporting high confidence. Mareforma detects this automatically. Origin as epistemic honesty. The distinction between ANALYTICAL (data ran) and INFERRED (LLM reasoning) is recorded permanently at assertion time. An agent that asserts ANALYTICAL on a silent pipeline failure is making a claim the graph will preserve, and that a reviewer can challenge. Accumulation, not evaporation. Findings persist across runs. When a new agent asserts something, it can query what is already established and build on it withDERIVED classification. Knowledge compounds instead of
resetting with every run.
Documented contestation. When a new finding contradicts an established
one, both coexist in the graph with an explicit contradicts[] link. Science
advances by documented tension, not by one side being silently overwritten.
Human oversight at the right layer. Agents accumulate at machine speed.
Humans review at the ESTABLISHED gate: not per step, but per finding that
has earned independent replication. The graph does the accumulation; the
human does the validation.