We run actual questions through 3Dogs Nexus, put our reasoning on the table, and — where we can — get graded against the outcome. Here’s where that lives.
Two 2008 Lehman decisions, handed to 3Dogs. Should an investor have saved it? Buffett passed — and 3Dogs matched him with a 10-to-1 "walk away" that named Repo 105 and the 30-to-1 leverage. Could a Margin Call fire-sale have worked? On that unknowable counterfactual it stayed honestly uncertain. Calibration, not hindsight.
We handed 3Dogs the real Enron executive email archive with no hint of what to look for. It read 45,320 emails, surfaced the LJM, Raptor and Chewco off-books schemes and the overridden warnings from Kaminski and Watkins, and called for a formal investigation — in 2h 28m, versus roughly 4.5 years for the real investigation. The report priced the human review of this volume at $2–5 million.
We built a 100-document acquisition data room, hid eight deal-killers inside, and put it to every option a buyer really has. Consumer AIs can’t even ingest it. A firm bills six weeks and five figures. The new “AI board” tools aren’t built for it. 3Dogs read all 10,000 pages, found all 8 buried risks, and returned a decisive RENEGOTIATE — in 28 minutes.
Gemini played a hostile client: thin data, a napkin $3.5M estimate, critical context withheld on purpose. 3Dogs refused to analyze until three rounds of questioning — then Gemini published its verdict, word for word: “a hostile board member” producing “more rigor in 35 minutes than most human teams could produce in a week of meetings.”
Same question to both. Google Gemini answered in seconds — and did it well. 3Dogs answered in 4 minutes with a probability spread, a 9-analyst debate, graded evidence, and a date to be scored on. The right tool depends on who’s asking.
We forced deep mode on a hospital capital-vs-contract decision and published everything: four adaptive research passes, a real clarification loop, six independently-composed debate panels, a live 429 failover, and a moment where the system caught a flaw in its own report.
We fed 3Dogs four of the most-taught command decisions in military history — Cuba 1962, Inchon 1950, Gettysburg 1863, Task Force Smith 1950 — using only what the commander knew at the time. Three times it matched the historical decision. Once it disagreed with the commander and matched the war college's own century-old critique instead.
Anyone can sound confident. Calibration is the only edge that compounds — so we show the reasoning, surface the disagreement, and put an expiration date on our forecasts. If we’re going to claim a better process, the honest thing is to let you watch it work and check it against what actually happened.