This product was not featured by Product Hunt yet. It will not be visible on their landing page and won't be ranked (cannot win product of the day regardless of upvotes).
Product upvotes vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product comments vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvote speed vs the next 3
Waiting for data. Loading
Product upvotes and comments
Waiting for data. Loading
Product vs the next 3
Loading
Delphi Pythia
Research platform that measures which arguments change minds
Polls tell you what people think. Focus groups tell you what they say. Neither tells you which arguments actually change minds. Ask an LLM what the public thinks and you get a plausible hallucination. Delphi Pythia is a deliberation platform: real respondents supply every claim, AI maps the debate, and randomized experiments prove which arguments actually work. Try the AI Governance demo case on the website: https://delphipythia.xyz/ai_governance/
I built Delphi Pythia out of frustration with a simple gap: polls tell you what people think, focus groups tell you what they say - but nothing tells you which arguments actually change minds. And the new wave of "synthetic respondent" AI tools makes it worse: ask an LLM what the public thinks and you get a confident hallucination.
Pythia works the other way around. Real people answer in their own words, and AI only reads and maps, clustering free text into a live picture of every distinct argument in a debate. Then the survey itself becomes an experiment: each respondent is exposed to a randomized subset of arguments, so "this argument is persuasive" is a measured causal effect.
Surprise: the arguments people rate highest are not the strongest movers - the arguments that actually shifted opinions were often different ones.
One thing I'm proud of: the insights are built bottom-up. There are no predefined answer options. The map of the debate is assembled entirely from what respondents actually say, so our own assumptions never shape what we find.
The first pilot ran on "Who should set the rules for AI?" There's a public demo on the site.
Curious: which debate would you start at first?
About Delphi Pythia on Product Hunt
“Research platform that measures which arguments change minds”
Delphi Pythia was submitted on Product Hunt and earned 0 upvotes and 3 comments, placing #118 on the daily leaderboard. Polls tell you what people think. Focus groups tell you what they say. Neither tells you which arguments actually change minds. Ask an LLM what the public thinks and you get a plausible hallucination. Delphi Pythia is a deliberation platform: real respondents supply every claim, AI maps the debate, and randomized experiments prove which arguments actually work. Try the AI Governance demo case on the website: https://delphipythia.xyz/ai_governance/
On the analytics side, Delphi Pythia competes within Analytics, Artificial Intelligence and Data & Analytics — topics that collectively have 652.2k followers on Product Hunt. The dashboard above tracks how Delphi Pythia performed against the three products that launched closest to it on the same day.
Who hunted Delphi Pythia?
Delphi Pythia was hunted by Stepan Goncharov. A “hunter” on Product Hunt is the community member who submits a product to the platform — uploading the images, the link, and tagging the makers behind it. Hunters typically write the first comment explaining why a product is worth attention, and their followers are notified the moment they post. Around 79% of featured launches on Product Hunt are self-hunted by their makers, but a well-known hunter still acts as a signal of quality to the rest of the community. See the full all-time top hunters leaderboard to discover who is shaping the Product Hunt ecosystem.
For a complete overview of Delphi Pythia including community comment highlights and product details, visit the product overview.
Stepan Goncharov
I built Delphi Pythia out of frustration with a simple gap: polls tell you what people think, focus groups tell you what they say - but nothing tells you which arguments actually change minds. And the new wave of "synthetic respondent" AI tools makes it worse: ask an LLM what the public thinks and you get a confident hallucination.
Pythia works the other way around. Real people answer in their own words, and AI only reads and maps, clustering free text into a live picture of every distinct argument in a debate. Then the survey itself becomes an experiment: each respondent is exposed to a randomized subset of arguments, so "this argument is persuasive" is a measured causal effect.
Surprise: the arguments people rate highest are not the strongest movers - the arguments that actually shifted opinions were often different ones.
One thing I'm proud of: the insights are built bottom-up. There are no predefined answer options. The map of the debate is assembled entirely from what respondents actually say, so our own assumptions never shape what we find.
The first pilot ran on "Who should set the rules for AI?" There's a public demo on the site.
Curious: which debate would you start at first?