Overall read
Your presentation at the AI Showcase Night received an average audience reaction score of 2.7/5 from 6 responses. The feedback shows a highly polarized audience. While some attendees were very eager to connect and rated your pitch a 5/5 [Feedback 4, Feedback 5], others felt completely disconnected, rating it 1/5 [Feedback 1, Feedback 2, Feedback 3]. The core value of your concept is recognized by some, but a lack of clarity in your delivery and explanation of the problem left a significant portion of the audience confused.

Product and demo strengths
Your technical capability and the core concept of your product showed promise to some audience members. An attendee highlighted your "Good technical knowledge" [Feedback 1], and another noted that "Detecting flaws in people’s statements is hugely important" [Feedback 5]. There is also appreciation for your "Interesting thinking" as you continue to develop the idea [Feedback 6].

Business clarity and credibility gaps
The primary barrier for the audience was understanding what your business actually does and what problem it solves. One attendee noted a "Difficulty to understand the problem aiming to be solved" [Feedback 2], while another bluntly stated they had "No clue what he was talking about" [Feedback 3]. There are also doubts about the market viability, with one reviewer suggesting it "Doesn't actually solve s problem" because people would rather be told lies they like than truths they do not [Feedback 1]. Finally, you face credibility gaps regarding your product's operations and reliability, specifically on "How are you feeding posts into this platform?" [Feedback 5] and the "« fiabilité du resultat »" [Feedback 6].

Representative feedback
"Good technical knowledge" [Feedback 1]
"Difficulty to understand the problem aiming to be solved" [Feedback 2]
"Presenter is a bit rambly/tangent-prone" [Feedback 4]
"Detecting flaws in people’s statements is hugely important" [Feedback 5]

Suggested next experiments
First, refine your presentation style to improve comprehension. Attendees suggested focusing on "Clarity in the presentation + tempo + more prep" [Feedback 2] to address being "a bit rambly/tangent-prone" [Feedback 4] and to make the pitch "more accessible to understand" [Feedback 6]. 
Second, experiment with different product delivery formats to reduce user friction. You might test if the tool can "be turned into a browser extension to eliminate some frictions" [Feedback 4] or explore if the technology could be "turned into journalism" [Feedback 5]. 
Lastly, focus on maturing the core product [Feedback 6] and clearly explaining how you ensure the reliability of your results [Feedback 6].