Predicting Startup Exit from Textual Descriptors - A Computational Linguistics Framework

Structured launch signals on Product Hunt contain statistically significant predictive information for Series A funding outcomes. We construct PHBench from 67,292 featured Product Hunt posts spanning 2019-2025, linked to Crunchbase funding records via deterministic domain matching, identifying 528 verified Series A raises within 18 months of launch (positive rate: 0.78%). Our best-performing model, a three-component ensemble (ENS_avg, ENS_ISO, XGB) selected by validation F0.5, achieves F0.5 = 0.097 and AP = 0.037 (95% CI: 0.024-0.072; 4.7x lift over random) on the private held-out test set (103 positives). A paired bootstrap confirms a statistically credible advantage over the logistic regression baseline (AP delta: +0.013, 95% CI: [0.004, 0.039], p < 0.001; F0.5 delta: +0.056, 95% CI: [0.006, 0.122], p = 0.016). Validation-set metrics (F0.5 = 0.284, AP = 0.126) reflect best-of-144 selection bias on 53 positives and are reported for benchmark reproducibility only. We further evaluate three zero-shot Gemini models (Gemini 2.5 Flash, Gemini 3 Flash, and Gemini 3.1 Pro) in an anonymized numerical setting. The best LLM achieves AP = 0.034 (Gemini 3 Flash), below the LR baseline AP of 0.044. Notably, the most capable Gemini variant (Gemini 3.1 Pro, AP = 0.023) performs worst -- an unexpected pattern that warrants further investigation across providers and prompting strategies. Both ML and LLM models show the same temporal performance decay tracking the 2020-2021 funding boom and subsequent contraction, confirming the dataset captures genuine market structure rather than noise. PHBench provides a reproducible framework comprising public training, validation, and blind test splits; 61 engineered features; a five-metric evaluation harness; and a public leaderboard at https://phbench.com. All code, baseline models, and anonymized dataset splits are publicly available.

Founders face two linked decisions: whether to pursue an idea before founding, and which operating actions and capital partners fit afterward. We present a public-data decision-support toolchain combining time-bounded proposal profiling, market and moat checks, and deterministic aggregation with auditable investor-company event chains for retrospective analysis. Pre-founding: (a) After threshold selection on 198 development companies, the frozen pipeline achieves F0.5=0.5357 [0.412, 0.655] on an independent, row-disjoint 198-company validation sample. On the combined 396 rows, the Full Pipeline scores 0.6301 versus 0.2734 for a paired Raw LLM baseline. Post-stratification of 1,027 completed cases in a separate scale cohort yields 0.6506 [0.598, 0.707]; the run remains incomplete. A 377-row composition-matched check yields 0.6573. (b) The AI-inference study identifies distribution-layer businesses as a replicable path to independent profitability with a limited revenue ceiling, and frontier-model ownership as a path to capital-market upside at exceptional capital cost. Post-founding: (a) Public sources support auditable event-chain analysis. (b) In the chip-company study, sustained product, customer, and supply-chain progress is associated with better observed outcomes; financing alone does not establish operating progress. (c) Financing comprises 79% of confirmed visible post-investment actions. Evidence tentatively favors acquisition-experienced strategic corporate investors for acquisition-oriented founders and financing-led institutional VCs with fewer observed control events for independence-oriented founders. Findings are developmental and observational, not causal guarantees or investment advice. We release shared ontology, provenance-bearing EventChain data, schemas, benchmarks, and executable skills for audit, reuse, and extension.

Dictionary methods, topic models, and embedding-similarity scorers are widely used in CSS and management research to measure constructs such as "entrepreneurial spirit" in corporate speeches. We contribute a label-light measurement diagnostic for such instruments rather than a new extraction model. On a corpus of 80 speeches by leaders of centrally administered Chinese state-owned enterprises, we exploit a natural experiment of 24 same-company different-speaker pairs and 5 same-company same-speaker pairs to test whether a method's per-document indices vary with leader identity holding firm constant. LDA fails (Cohen d=0.20, 95% CI [-0.72, 1.20]); a dictionary scorer reaches d=0.81 and a Chinese sentence encoder d=0.65 on doc-vector distances of order 10^-3. A zero-shot 9B open-weight LLM (Qwen3.5:9b) raises paired-contrast d to 1.09 (exact permutation p1=0.034). We downgrade three claims accordingly: gold F1 measures consistency with the LLM's own prompt rule rather than external construct recovery; doc-level style residualisation cuts the LLM's d to 0.43 (p1=0.22), so roughly half of the effect is consistent with leader idiolect; and a confidence-weighted calibration trades Delta for variance with an auto-mined slogan lexicon near-inert in ablation. We release the 2,190-segment scored corpus, the 170-paragraph pilot, the slogan lexicon, two-family LLM scores, and the evaluation harness.