How Luhn works
Calibrated narrative intelligence for the multifamily housing and proptech sector. We compress fragmented public evidence into named narratives, track our predictions accountably over time, and publish the discipline as well as the conclusions.
Every brief states what it does not claim. The line between observed or executed events and posture or risk is named explicitly, not implied.
“No criminal indictment has been filed. This brief evaluates enforcement posture, not completed prosecution.”
Every brief carries at least one substantive disconfirming condition — what would weaken or invalidate the thesis. Never a throwaway hedge. The counter-signal is the firewall against over-narrativizing.
Confidence is a lifecycle position, not a number. Early Signal → Strengthening → Confirmed Trend → High Conviction. Each band has to be earned by evidence. The raw scoring composition — consequence, source quality, novelty, contradiction, velocity, cross-source confirmation — is visible on every brief page. Transparent, not a black box.
A separate axis from maturity. Where a thesis sits in its lifecycle: Emerging → Strengthening → Confirmed → Weakening → Invalidated. We move briefs through these states in public as evidence arrives or fails to.
Every brief carries three to five specific, monitorable events. Both confirming and disconfirming. We track outcomes and publish them — including the ones that don't materialize.
We ingest from primary regulator filings, major wires, sector trade publications, and selected legal and research aggregators. Source quality is weighted by publisher proximity to the source event, not by feed configuration. The full source-quality model is published.
We don't auto-publish anything reader-facing. AI drafts; an editor reads, calibrates, and publishes. The discipline is the product.
We don't synthesize aggregate figures unless one source states them. We don't imply events have happened when only authorization or referral exists. We don't use reckoning, collapse, crisis, fracture, criminal, exposure, wave, trap, or reset unless the evidence specifically earns them.
Richard Millar Devens used the phrase business intelligence in print in 1865, describing a banker named Sir Henry Furnese who gathered information before his competitors and acted on it. Hans Peter Luhn formalized the practice in his 1958 IBM paper. We sit in both traditions: the practice as old as commerce, the discipline as old as computing, the accountability as new as we are willing to demonstrate.
This page is the methodology of record. If a published brief on Luhn does not adhere to what is described here, the brief is wrong, not the methodology.