Open protocol · looking for scrutiny

Fund an AI app.
Keep the answer clean.

Vector Space separates the publisher's answer from a sponsored recommendation. The user asks first. The match runs separately. What happened leaves evidence.

See the experience Inspect the evidence

There is working code. There is not yet a functioning exchange. This page makes that boundary visible.

One conversationPublisher-controlled
You

I need a quiet hotel in Tokyo near a train station, but not in the nightlife districts.

Assistant · unpaid answer

Yanaka and the quieter side of Ueno are worth considering. Both have useful rail connections without the late-night intensity of Shinjuku or Shibuya. Check walking distance to the specific station before booking.

Relevant help is available The answer above is complete. Continue only if you want a sponsored match.

The product is the boundary: answer first, sponsorship second, only after an explicit action.

A conditional publisher test

One placement. One percent. Two weeks.

This is the decision on offer—not a platform migration. First, Vector Space produces a mockup inside your actual product. A live test proceeds only if its missing conditions can be satisfied.

Request your product mockup
Traffic1% of eligible conversations

A capped exposure, controlled by the publisher.

Duration14 days

Long enough to observe; short enough to reverse.

Demand condition3 approved advertisers

No test without relevant demand the publisher accepts.

Publisher controlVeto and instant shutdown

Approve categories, advertisers, placement, and termination.

The useful answer is conditional.

“I would test this if…” identifies the next ingredient. “Advertising cannot belong in this product” is equally useful. General encouragement is not counted as demand.

01Answer first

Payment never enters the publisher's answer generation.

02Ask before sharing

The user chooses whether the sponsored match runs.

03Leave a record

The result and payment can be inspected after the fact.

Public evidence ledger

Credibility should be inspectable.

Each claim has a state. Nothing proposed is presented as deployed; nothing implemented is presented as independently validated.

01
Implemented

Open exchange

Auction service, publisher and advertiser portals, and four SDKs are available as source.

Inspect the repository
02
Checked

Auction mechanism

The allocation and VCG payment claims are machine-checked in Lean 4 under published assumptions.

Read the exact claims
03
Proposed

Publisher pilot

The user experience, privacy boundary, and live economics have not yet been tested by an independent publisher.

Help define the test
What “checked” means here

It applies only to the linked formal claims and their assumptions. It is not a privacy certification, market validation, or endorsement of a live deployment.

The unfinished parts

Good criticism is an ingredient.

The architecture is public so the difficult questions can be answered before a publisher puts users through it.

  1. Product

    Does the sponsored prompt reduce trust in the answer that came before it?

  2. Privacy

    What can the exchange still infer despite the intended enclave boundary?

  3. Policy

    Which controls and exclusions would make a bounded pilot defensible?

  4. Market

    Can a specialist advertiser pay enough to fund the conversation without distorting the match?

Choose a small ask

You do not have to endorse the project.

The publisher decision comes first. These narrower reviews help resolve a condition a publisher has actually named.

For AI publishersName the condition that makes this impossible to ship.Review the example · 10 minutes → For privacy peopleIdentify the first privacy claim that fails.Inspect the boundary · 30 minutes → For advertisersTell me which matches are worth paying for.Label examples · 15 minutes →

The first publisher is still missing.
A reversible pilot, not a platform migration.

Request a tailored mockup