Do you plan to offer an API as an alternative to the UI linked?
not in the near term but happy to talk about what your use case might be if you want to shoot me an email at joseph(at)meticulate(dot)ai
Readit NewsJPalakapilly commented on Launch HN: Meticulate (YC W24) – LLM pipelines for business research · Posted by u/JPalakapilly
JPalakapilly commented on Launch HN: Meticulate (YC W24) – LLM pipelines for business research · Posted by u/JPalakapilly
Congrats on the launch!
If I have want to help you in your roadmap- specifically around Find Companies, how can I contribute?
Thanks! shoot me an email at joseph(at)meticulate(dot)ai
JPalakapilly commented on Launch HN: Meticulate (YC W24) – LLM pipelines for business research · Posted by u/JPalakapilly
> delivering results 50x faster at 50x less cost
What about quality of results? Are you measuring that too? Did you do so for the traditional reference practice? Using what sort of methodology? How did it your technique compare in quality? What kind of errors was it most likely to make? What techniques have you devised for spotting those errors? Are they the same kind of errors that users would experience when outsourcing? Are the errors easier or harder to spot for one than the other? Are they faster to remediate with one?
I see a clever concept but given the state of LLM's and the nature of how they work, I don't know that nominal cost and speed differences are really enough to sell on. Not for something "crucial to big business decisions." I'd want to know that my failure/miss rate is no worse than when outsourcing and that my net cost and time (including error identification and recovery) still end up ahead. I don't see either of those vital issues touched upon here.
This is a great point. We completely agree that high-quality results is essential for adoption. It's basically table stakes for any tool like this to be useful. We've had several versions of this tool that weren't quite "good enough" and never saw any real use. Our latest version seems to meet the first quality threshold for actual work use.
Our method of evaluating quality is not super systematic right now. For this competitive landscape task, we have a "test suite" of ~10 companies and for each we have a sort of "must-include", "should-include", "could-include" set of competitors that should be surfaced. We run these through our tool and others and look at precision and recall on the competitor sets.
In terms of errors, right now our results are a little noisy, since we're biased towards being exhaustive vs selective. There are obviously irrelevant companies in the results that no human would have ever included. Our users can fairly easily filter these out by reading the one sentence overviews of the companies but it's still not a great UX. Actively working on this.
JPalakapilly commented on Launch HN: Meticulate (YC W24) – LLM pipelines for business research · Posted by u/JPalakapilly
Congrats on the Launch HN!
I've heard a few investor types say something like "You know what's surprisingly fun? Popping an edible and making market maps"
Here is an example output: https://meticulate.ai/workflow/3b3fe891f16fc437acca87c0
It was really nice to go away for a few minutes and come back to this. Output is not perfect, but I wouldn't expect it to be at this stage.
I assume slide deck output is on the way?
Hahaha that reminds me of Erlich tripping in the desert trying to come up with one-liners for Pied Piper. Yeah definitely know our results are not perfect. We're going for being as exhaustive as possible right now so results can be noisy. And yes, slide generation is on the very near-term (next few days) roadmap :)