Every piece of intellectual property inside SmartOne that could become a named product. Scored against build effort, market demand, and differentiation. The raw material for the platform spec.
The hypothesis is correct. The 10-20 open-source tools referenced on the call are already in use. The platform does not need to be invented; it needs to be packaged. This inventory is the first step of that packaging: naming what exists, scoring it, and deciding what to build toward.
| Asset name | Description | Current form | Build effort to productize | Market demand signal | Differentiation vs. Labelbox / Snorkel |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [e.g., Temporal annotation schema] | [Multi-frame labeling ontology for physical world sequences] | [Internal doc / tool / workflow] | [Small / Medium / Large] | [Buyers asking for this type of deliverable?] | [What Labelbox does not do here] |
| [e.g., QA dashboard] | [Real-time accuracy tracking and reprocessing trigger] | [Internal tool] | [Placeholder] | [Placeholder] | [Placeholder] |
| [e.g., Open-source tool N] | [Placeholder] | [Placeholder] | [Placeholder] | [Placeholder] | [Placeholder] |
| Criterion | What it measures |
|---|---|
| Build effort | How much engineering work to turn the internal asset into something a buyer can use without SmartOne's help |
| Market demand signal | Are buyers explicitly asking for this, or does SmartOne believe they will? Actual demand beats hypothesis. |
| Differentiation | Does Labelbox, Snorkel, or any comparable do this already? If yes, what makes SmartOne's version different? |
| Defense of the moat | Does productizing this strengthen SmartOne's institutional workforce differentiator, or does it commoditize it? |