The opposing expert’s
report, before they write it.
Supreme Mind simulates the expert the other side will retain: their likely opinion, the weaknesses a cross would target, the Rule 702 attack surface, and what it means for the settlement range. Every supporting quote verified against the public record.
Individual simulations are $50 each. Example cases are free on a firm email address, and firms run on credit plans with volume pricing. See pricing.
The seventh revolution in law.
Six times, knowledge a small class controlled became legible to everyone who needed it, and six times lawyers ended up more capable rather than less necessary. The seventh arrived in 2025, when frontier models crossed PhD-level performance on the reasoning expert work runs on and the federal record became machine-readable. It is the first where what gets automated is not the finding. It is the thinking.
Nine hundred and seventy-nine years separated the first two. Thirteen separated the last two.
Read the whole arc →The same expert read, at three orders of magnitude less.
Firms stop rationing the read. They run it on every matter and every expert, before they commit.
The same thirty days, spent on argument instead of waiting.
Rule 26(a)(2)(D) gives you 30 days to rebut a served expert report. Nothing moves that deadline: not the discovery stay, not the court’s calendar, not us. What changes is how much of the window is left once you understand what you are answering.
- Retaining an expert for the first read · 18 days · $25,000 to $45,000
- Drafting · 7 days
- Moot · 5 days
You reach the moot with a first draft.
- The same read, simulated · 90 seconds on day zero
- Building and testing the cross against the expert · 20 days
- Rehearsed moot, then file · 10 days
The first read arrives on day zero, in about 90 seconds. You still read the report yourself. What you no longer wait weeks for is an expert telling you where it is weak.
The strategic artifact.
The settlement engine.
Layer one: the per-archetype simulation, returning a structured artifact your trial team can act on. Layer two: a thousand agent-to-agent simulations across the case fact pattern, surfacing the top and bottom one percent of strategic outcomes.
The Archetype Simulation
One archetype. One fact pattern. About 60 to 90 seconds of frontier-model reasoning. The output is the strategic artifact a senior expert produces in the first weeks of an engagement, delivered in seconds for $50 per simulation.
- Likely opinion: what the archetype concludes given the fact pattern, in the archetype's voice and methodological vocabulary
- Cross-examination weaknesses: ranked vulnerabilities a competent opposing attorney would target, citations to the case file
- Methodology challenges: Daubert, Frye and FRE 702 attack surface, keyed to challenges documented in the public record
- Settlement-range implications: directional signal on how the testimony shifts the settlement distribution, with explicit uncertainty
- Never filed, never testifies: internal strategy for your team, not a testifying opinion, which sidesteps the admissibility question entirely
- Public-record training data: bounded, citable, defensible
- Methodology fidelity to the expert class, built from the public corpus. A class, never a named individual
The Agent-to-Agent Settlement Engine
A thousand simulations per matter. Your archetype roster argues against opposing counsel's archetype roster across the full case fact pattern. The top one percent of outcomes surfaces the arguments and strategies that maximize settlement leverage. The bottom one percent surfaces the destructive paths to avoid before they show up at trial.
Layer one makes one expert cheap. Layer one thousand makes the whole argument searchable. Where this goes is a world where the other side is running the same thing, and the advantage moves to whoever has explored more of the space before the first deposition is taken.
- 1,000 agent-to-agent simulations per matter, on the same archetype infrastructure
- Top 1%: the argument paths that maximize settlement leverage for your firm
- Bottom 1%: the destructive strategies to identify and avoid
- Sensitivity analysis: which assumption or witness choice shifts the verdict band
- Research preview: design partners only
Put him on the stand before the deposition.
The four artifacts are the static deliverable. This is the other half: you play counsel, the engine voices the expert defending its own report from the facts of the matter. Ask the questions in order, then switch the posture and run it again. A cooperative witness lets you walk a straight line; a hostile one makes you build the same line out of closed questions.
Your market model for January 31 produced an R-squared of 0.123. Correct?
That figure appears in my report.
A worked example on a public-record matter. The archetype is a class of expert, never a named individual, and nothing said here is filed or offered as testimony.
The whole product, on one real case.
Three minutes on Cohen v. Luckin Coffee: the extracted facts, a live event study on Luckin’s actual prices, the four-part brief, and a cross-examination of the opposing expert. Narrated.
Supreme MindBuilt deep, one vertical at a time.
Each archetype library covers the expert classes, methodology canon and Daubert-vulnerable patterns that define a practice area. We ship verticals one at a time, in order of pipeline pull.
Section 10(b), Halliburton II & Delaware Chancery
The defense event-study econometrician and the valuation and fairness-opinion economist are live today. Eight more archetypes, spanning forensic accounting, governance, and pay economics, are in build behind them.
Explore the Securities library →Cartel, Overcharge & Class-Wide Impact
The defense cartel econometrician is live today. Common-impact, pass-through, market-definition, and merger-effects archetypes are in build behind it.
Explore the Antitrust library →MDL, Toxic Tort & Coordination
MDL coordinating-counsel scale. Causation toxicologists, industrial hygienists, epidemiologists, OB-nursing, and the "every-exposure" Daubert weapon across asbestos, talc, PFAS, and Roundup dockets.
Request early access →Biomechanical, Medical & Life-Care
Anchored on the foundational biomechanical archetype, the highest-priority cluster in the taxonomy. Lifetime-earnings economists, life-care planners, MRI radiologists, neuropsychologists, accident reconstructionists.
Request early access →Contract, Partnership & Arbitration
Cross-rehearsal infrastructure for high-stakes commercial trials. Damages quantum, custom-and-practice, forensic accounting, and the fact-witness rehearsal layer that runs across every commercial matter.
Request early access →Live, In Build & On the Roadmap
The full vertical map: what is live today, what is in build, and what ships next, in order of pipeline pull.
See every vertical →