Is this thing worth doing? True-demand value assessment

What this is

One of our published methods, written in plain language: what it can do, when to use it, what goes in and what comes out.

Why it matters

Most methods are published as papers or code. This one is written so you can decide whether it fits your problem before you invest time in it.

How to use it

Read the page top to bottom. If it matches your question, use the online tool - or subscribe and run it on your own data.

What you get

A clear answer on what the method does and does not do, plus a live curve from our own demand series. Free to read.

Free to readOnline tools from $5 per runSee it →

Demand curve read by this method — A live reading from our own demand series - the shape of the signal this method works on. 570 industries are tracked daily; this is one of them.

Our own data: 391 cities and 213,208 city x industry records, all scored in-house (2026-10-08).
Data base: InfoGap own records - 391 Chinese cities x 8 dimensions, 213,208 city-industry rows, 40,499 POIs (central / lifechain, 2026-10-08).

InfoGap Algorithm Handbook · one algorithm per page · no jargon · formal name: True-demand value assessment V1–V3

1In one line: what it does

Score a thing, it tells you what makes it valuable, and it ends with one verdict: "worth doing" or not.

2When to use it

It helps in these three situations:

You want to open a Chinese medicine clinic in Shanghai, and you have seen a table saying this combination scores well — but "high score" and "worth doing" are two different things.

What people usually do: see that someone else's shop is doing well, and copy it.

Use it: score three things separately — how easy the shop itself is to use, how good it feels to use, and whether it builds up into an asset — and it gives you one overall verdict.

You want to build a small AI dress-up tool (upload a photo, get folk costume), but you are not sure whether people play with it once and drop it, or it can sell for a long time.

What people usually do: launch it straight away and see whether anyone turns up.

Use it: score it first to see whether it is "function-led" or "emotion-led" — the two playbooks are completely different.

You have to pick one project out of several to do, and they all look lively.

What people usually do: pick the one they like most.

Use it: score every one of them and line the totals up before deciding.

3What goes in · what comes out

Inputs (this is the exact set used for the real run)

· Product name: Shanghai Chinese medicine clinic
· One-line description: in-store service; from row 15 of the gap table, city demand 0.961, direction up
· Usability, three items (efficiency, cost saving, coverage): 6 / 5 / 5 (out of 10)
· Chance of being displaced by something else: 0.4 (higher = easier to replace)
· How it feels to use, three items (reassurance, pleasure, showing off): 8 / 4 / 3 (out of 10)
· Whether it holds its value (can it be resold, do people recognise it, is it scarce): 2 / 7 / 6

What comes out

These numbers came out of it on the spot, with not one character changed:

Usability value: 0.94 (very high) — held up by "usability"
Feeling value: 0.88 (very strong) — the strongest single item is "reassurance" (against fear)
Holding value: 0.80 (good) — many people recognise it, but hard to resell
All three together: 0.877
Which type it is: 🟢 Function-led (its value comes mainly from usability)
The one-line verdict: ✅ Worth doing (build the chain), reason "overall value 0.877 is not below 0.5"

—— push the scores down (all three usability items set to 1, easy-to-replace set to 0.9) ——
Usability value drops to 0.865, feeling value drops to 0.73
Which shows the score really does follow the numbers you enter.

How to read it: Look at which of the three is highest — that one is its lifeline, and that is where you should push afterwards. In the clinic set it is "usability", so its playbook is "cut cost, raise efficiency, widen coverage"; if "feeling" were highest, the playbook would have to switch to "manufacture experience and talking points". Only move on when the total score is above 0.5.

📈One chart: three kinds of value, which one is not accumulating

Easy to use, good to feel, able to accumulate — the shortest one decides whether the thing can carry a chain.

4How to use it

There is no public calculator for this yet — the method above is the whole procedure, and on this site the inputs have to be keyed in by hand.

Write down the three groups of scores: usability (efficiency, cost saving, coverage), the chance of being displaced, feeling (reassurance, pleasure, showing off), and holding value (resale, recognition, scarcity)
Add the product name and the one-line description beside them
Work out the three sub-scores and the total the same way this page does it in section 3
Read which of the three is highest, the total score, and that one-line verdict

5Who it is for

People about to open a shop or launch a new product; people who have to pick one project out of several; people who have been told "this one makes money" and want to check it themselves before believing it.

6Common questions

Q: Are the three groups of scores something I fill in myself?

A: Yes. The ledger does not hold these scores, so the default given is a middle value that you change on the spot according to what you know. It will not go and look anything up for you.

Q: Is 0.877 high?

A: By its rules, 0.5 is the line for "you can carry on". 0.877 counts as fairly solid. But note: switch to a different category of inputs and the score barely moves — its power to tell categories apart is limited, so do not treat it as a precise scale.

Q: What does "build the chain" mean?

A: It means you can build a complete business chain around it (finding customers, closing the sale, repeat customers, repurchase — the whole set). The other way round: when the score is not enough it says "do not build yet".

7Related algorithms

demand-verify · is there really someone who wants it five-dim-gold · scoring from five angles three-d-profit · is this lane naturally profitable ← Back to the Algorithm Handbook Handbook index

✓Why this scenario exists (where the content comes from)

This scenario comes from the records of the "algorithm meets demand" round: the Shanghai · Chinese medicine clinic need was run against three algorithms, and this one was judged "useful" because "the score changes as soon as the inputs change slightly — it is not just decoration".

The inputs and outputs above were obtained by re-running the original inputs in the record: product name "Shanghai Chinese medicine clinic", description from row 15 of the gap table, total score 0.877, verdict "worth doing".

Source: row 15 of the on-site city × industry gap table (Shanghai · Chinese medicine clinic, score=120.10); the D2 record in the matched-need ledger.