We built a model that scores pitch delivery, not just the script, here's what it caught in a real pitch

Reddit r/ArtificialInteligence Products
pitch-scoring delivery-analysis confidence-detection inter-1 streaming demo

Summary

A product demo that uses Inter-1 to score pitch delivery signals (confidence, hesitation, energy) alongside content score in real time, tested on a real pitch where it caught a hesitation on the traction number.

Following up on our Inter-1 Streaming work (some of you may have seen our earlier post on the hallucination bug we found). This time it's a product demo rather than a research writeup. The core idea: transcript-based pitch scoring can't tell the difference between a confident claim and a hedged one, because the words on the page can be identical. "We're growing 40% month over month" reads the same whether you believe it or not. We built a demo that streams video to Inter-1 in real time and scores delivery signals (confidence, hesitation, energy) alongside a content score, each signal tied to the exact moment it happened. Tested it on my own pitch. Content scored 87. Delivery caught a hesitation landing right on the traction number, confidence at 50, overall dropped to 80. Read more here: https://www.interhuman.ai/blog/pitch-practice-demo
Original Article

Similar Articles

PitchDrop.ai

Product Hunt

PitchDrop.ai is a new AI-powered tool designed to serve as a pitch advisor for presentations.

1752vc Pitch Deck Analyzer

Product Hunt

The 1752vc Pitch Deck Analyzer provides AI-driven feedback on startup pitch decks, trained on over 25,000 real decks to help entrepreneurs identify fundability issues before investor outreach.

xPitch

Product Hunt

xPitch is a mobile app offering football match analytics for casual players, akin to Strava for football.

@josephdecker: The winner of my 16-model eval fabricated 5 times in the audit. Second place, a tenth of a point back: zero fabrication…

X AI KOLs Timeline

Joseph Decker evaluates 16 AI models on truthfulness for his product Condensr, discovers that the leaderboard winner fabricated content five times in an audit, and instead ships the second-place model which had zero fabrications. The post details the evaluation process, a bug in the LLM judge that penalized accurate summaries due to truncated transcripts, and the importance of custom evals over generic benchmarks.