Ledger · 2026-09-04 · Electrochemistry / Biosensing
Laser-Induced Porous Graphene (LIG) Sensor Substrates via Direct-Laser Writing
Rejected
This concept did not clear the framework. The reasoning is published in full below.
What the assessment found
| Incumbent benchmark | Metrohm DropSens DRP-110 screen-printed carbon electrode |
| Entry application | Point-of-Care Food Safety and Veterinary Residue Detection |
| Measured advantage | 2.87-fold higher analytical sensitivity for sulfadimidine detection and 475% increase in peak current for nitrite oxidation compared to Metrohm DropSens DRP-110. |
| Time to first revenue | 9 months |
| Gross margin at parity | 95.5% |
| Startup CapEx | $45,000 |
| Payback from first sale | 0.1 months |
| Capital productivity | 192.0x |
| Regulatory risk | Moderate — qualification costs reported ($75,000 estimated) |
Why it failed
- Voided by: Mismatched comparison, Form-factor / handling regression, Absence search missing
- Evidence rests on non-peer-reviewed sources
- Absence asserted, search unreported
Assessment
The concept exhibits strong margins and clear scientific performance advantage, but fails due to a severe form-factor regression (flexible polyimide vs rigid ceramic card) requiring unproven interface adapters. Additionally, it lacks a structured Market Absence Ledger section with quantitative company/product search counts.
Also flagged
- Price parity asserted, not sourced
- runsheet_no_quantities
A rejection is not a claim that the science is wrong. It means the venture case did not survive: the comparator was not what the buyer actually buys, the comparison was not like-for-like, the advantage fell short of a step change, or the capital and time to first revenue were prohibitive.
Assessed 2026-09-04 against seven gates plus the voiding sub-tests. How the method works · Browse all concepts