In development · iOS & Web
A daily mystery game: read the evidence, build a theory and prove what happened.
For Players who like a daily puzzle, and want to be asked for proof rather than a lucky guess.
iOS / Web · Notes reviewed 20 September 2026
Read the people. Question the evidence. Make your case.
A generated mystery can sound convincing while containing an impossible answer, a hidden assumption, an obvious giveaway or simply a dull pile of documents. Fairness and entertainment are separate requirements. A correct answer alone also does not show whether the player understood the evidence.
Whereabouts is a daily deduction game built around the satisfaction of changing your mind and then proving what happened. The goal is a fair, human, memorable case that makes the player want another one tomorrow.
01Screen · Phone
People: each statement can be attached to a proof.
Native iOS simulator, authored sample case, captured during a UI test.
02Screen · Phone
Evidence: exhibits open one at a time.
Native iOS simulator, authored sample case, captured during a UI test.
03Screen · Phone
An exhibit says what it can and cannot establish.
Native iOS simulator, authored sample case, captured during a UI test.
04Screen · Phone
Theory plus proof: choose what is false, then show why.
Native iOS simulator, authored sample case, captured during a UI test.
How it is used
Interactive demo Computed in your browser
Read the people, check the evidence, then prove which statement is false. The case is graded the way the game grades one.
Portfolio sample · not a case from the app · Accessible · 3 min
A community radio station's evening show went on air ten minutes late. The station manager wants to know whose account of the evening does not hold up.
Which statement can you prove is false?
Priya Nair Producer
“I was in the studio from six o'clock and didn't step out once before we went on air.”
Tom Okafor Engineer
“I spent the whole evening up on the roof, fixing the transmitter.”
Lena Brandt Host
“I got to the station at a quarter to seven, right on time.”
01 · System
Making a case and publishing it are separate authorities.
Select a part to see what it is responsible for and what it connects to.
Concept exploration, with an experience director that can reject every idea before writing starts.
→ Case design and evidence: approved concept
Structured model tasks design the case and author its evidence.
→ Fairness gates: candidate case
→ Blind player: candidate case
Deterministic checks that the answer is derivable from the evidence.
→ Admission: receipts
Opens one chosen exhibit at a time, like a real player.
Trade-off: Slower and costlier than handing a reviewer the solution, and the only honest playtest.
→ Admission: transcript
Immutable revisions and admission rules form the release boundary; the generator cannot publish.
→ Web and iOS player: published case
Derives conclusions from the evidence a player actually selected, over supported rules only.
→ Web and iOS player: verdict
React and SwiftUI clients over authoritative game state in Supabase.
→ Deduction engine: theory and proof
The web player uses React and TypeScript, with a separate SwiftUI client. Supabase Postgres and Edge Functions hold authoritative game state and publication boundaries. The deduction engine operates over a finite authored world and supported rules, deriving conclusions from selected evidence. Generator Studio is an orchestration layer: concept exploration, an independent experience director, case design, evidence authoring, deterministic fairness gates, a sequential blind player, independent reviewers and a ship decision.
02
The logic model represents selectable artifacts, propositions and deduction steps. It can distinguish an entailed conclusion from incomplete or contradictory evidence.
Concept Forge explores alternatives and an Experience Director can reject all of them before the expensive case-writing stages.
The blind-player protocol reveals one chosen artifact at a time rather than giving a reviewer the complete solution and calling the result a playtest.
The feedback loop distinguishes a writing defect from an unsupported difficulty tier or a systemic kernel/pipeline problem. It can redesign, retier without rewriting, or stop rather than lowering the quality gate.
03
A web player and a native iOS client.
React · TypeScript · SwiftUI
Authoritative game state and the publication boundary.
Supabase · PostgreSQL · Edge Functions
Designing, writing and testing cases before anyone plays them.
Structured model tasks · Deterministic logic engine · Review and feedback orchestration
04
Approach
Deterministic checks establish properties of the declared logic; independent player and editorial review evaluates curiosity, voice, reinterpretation and whether the case earns another session.
Trade-off
A formal proof over authored propositions does not automatically prove that the prose communicates them fairly. The symbolic rules and the human reading experience are therefore checked separately.
Approach
The feedback loop preserves the selected concept, carries review findings and general lessons into bounded repairs, and records costs and stage outcomes. Systemic failures stop the writer loop.
Trade-off
A more deliberate process costs more than one-shot generation and can accept no cases. That is preferable to silently publishing weak content or treating a completed model call as a quality result.
05
Links checked 21 September 2026
Answers quote the source notes and cite them.
