Useful answers before the first call.

Pricing is scoped around the objective, inputs, technical uncertainty, deliverables, review cycle, timeline, and handover requirements. A written scope should exist before a project begins; there is no reliable one-price-fits-all figure for specialist work.

Timing depends on complexity, readiness of the inputs, feedback speed, dependencies, and the form of delivery. The proposed route should identify milestones and material schedule risks before work starts.

Do not send confidential research data, patient information, credentials, or personally identifiable material through the initial enquiry form. Data handling requirements and an appropriate transfer route must be agreed first.

Deliverables are defined per project. They may include deployed software, source code, prepared datasets, notebooks, technical reports, figures, documentation, configuration, or handover notes. Only the items listed in the agreed scope are included.

Review points and revision boundaries are agreed in scope. Revisions normally address the agreed objective and acceptance criteria; a changed objective or substantial new material may require a scope change.

A good starting point is a clear outcome, usable inputs, and a realistic route to validation. An initial discussion can identify fit, missing information, and whether another specialist or experimental route is needed.

No. Docking, similarity, modelling, machine learning, and computational rankings produce evidence with assumptions and uncertainty. They do not by themselves prove binding, biological activity, safety, or clinical efficacy.

Not yet. The current form helps structure and validate a project brief in the browser, but it does not transmit or store the submission. The page clearly reports this after review; a secure submission route will be added only when the backend is configured.