How we differ from population-simulation vendors.
A category of AI vendors now sells large-scale "simulation of people" to enterprises and governments: striking claims, gated demos, no published method. This page compares approaches, not companies — on the axes any serious buyer should test every vendor against, including us.
| Axis | Typical gated simulation vendor | LEXUN |
|---|---|---|
| Published method | Undisclosed; "proprietary simulation" | Full methodology public on the Accuracy Centre; model maths documented per domain in the method guides |
| Error bars | Point claims ("we predicted X within 0.n%") | Every probability shown as a band; binomial standard error disclosed; false precision refused by design |
| Calibration record | None published | Public Brier-scored record, computed only from resolved outcomes — currently an honest zero, and it says so |
| Reproducibility | Not offered | Seeded and versioned: identical inputs reproduce identical outputs — verify in your browser now |
| Access | Demo request, sales-gated | Free, no account, in your browser today |
| Refusal behaviour | An answer for everything | "Insufficient evidence" is a real output; out-of-scope domains are declined, not improvised |
| Data handling | Your scenario data on their servers | Local-first: decision data stays in your browser — architecture, plainly |
Fairness note: gated vendors may have strong internal validation we cannot see. That is precisely the point — a buyer cannot act on evidence they are not shown. Apply this table to us too: every LEXUN row above links to the artefact that proves it.
The questions to ask any simulation vendor
- Can I see the calibration record, and who computed it?
- What does a forecast look like when you are uncertain?
- Can I re-run yesterday's prediction and get the same answer?
- What happens when I ask something outside the model's competence?
- Where does my data live while you simulate with it?
We publish our answers. Demand everyone's.