The fundamental base of Neironix platform is a neural network doing the ICO assessment work evaluating numerous key risk factors. The automated assessment model promoted by Neironix logically stands in opposition to human assessment, i.e. opinions shared by human analysts and experts. We want to elaborate on why we stick to automated assessment and put it above assessment done by human analysts.

As far as ICO viability assessment goes, the goal of Neironix is to provide investors with unbiased risk evaluation that prevents inadequate risk taking owing to lack of information or to being fed falsified facts. The advantages of the neural network assessment-based over human assessment are as follows:

• The automated system works at a much faster pace than entire personnel of analysts in terms of data collection and compilation.

• The automated system also has such a system only it works more flawlessly and excludes any erratic judgments arising from tiredness or lack of concentration, which is a natural human trait.

• Still, the system takes into account the opinions of the project shared the virtual public space including social media and the mass media.

In terms of evaluation of the public opinions an automated system could be compared with a social survey done on a relevant target audience with the team of interviewers only being substituted by a neural network. This excludes the confusion that the respondent can start to feel when he is being asked by an interviewer and allows to embrace many more public opinions shared in the open public space.

One another great advantage of automated assessment for investors is protection of the system making the assessments from bribery and interference from third parties. It cannot and will not sell its good assessment of any project if it is given something good for itself and cannot be affected in providing its assessment because the result of its work is based on a large amount of data previously parsed, which it takes a comparably large amount of dataset to make changes in its assessment model.

Probably, the only part of the project that cannot be taken into account is the internal information about the product, the technical elements of what the project is working on shared only within the project’s team. But that will be likewise unavailable to human analysts to judge about.

Those reasons seem substantial enough for us to continue our promotion of automation approach and provision of higher precision in investments risk assessment in venture investment what the ICO seems to gradually, if not increasingly, become.