What we have built
Case studies
Projects that reached working code: contracted pilots, systems in operation and prototypes whose hypothesis was tested on real data. Client names stay private — only the industry, the task and what we could measure.
Every figure below was traced to a project artefact: contract scope, migrations, tests, deployment configs. Where the business effect is not yet measured, we state scope and timeline instead of percentages.
Commercial deployments
Work for external clients: from contracted pilots to systems serving live business processes.
Aviation — aircraft components trading and MRO
PilotAircraft parts procurement: from inbox chaos to a managed pipeline
An AI agent reads incoming RFQs, compares supplier quotes and checks trace documents; an operations system moves each deal through mandatory stages.
- Full loop
- full AI loop on a live procurement process — from incoming RFQ to team notification; confirmed by the owner
- 3
- types of trace documents checked by the agent: FAA 8130-3, EASA Form 1, COC; counted from the owner's brief
Distribution · Partner networks
In productionA sales and support platform for a distributed partner network
Partners ask who on their team is inactive and what blocks the next level — and get numbers for their own part of the network only, enforced at the SQL level.
- 20 of 21
- UAT checks passed on the client's live back-office database (reconciliation protocol); one partial — no last-activity date in the data
- 10 of 10
- question categories from the assistant behaviour spec (~25 scenarios) implemented; one sub-item outstanding (checklist count)
Manufacturing · Building materials
MVP in operationPanel specs from CAD drawings in seconds, not hours
Reads DWG/DXF layouts and builds the Excel spec: 10–30 seconds instead of 2–15 hours by hand. All 784 panels of one real project matched the manual spec line by line.
- 784/784 and 189/189
- panels on one project and wall panels on another matched the manual specs line by line, size groups included; area within 0.001 m²
- 2–15 h → 10–30 s
- to produce a project spec: manual work vs app processing, measured on real projects
Marketplace e-commerce · Sales analytics
In productionOne profit per SKU across three marketplaces, reconciled to 0.00%
Five seller accounts on WB, Ozon and Yandex Market merged into one SKU-level P&L: 0.00% variance vs the client's manual benchmark, forecast 2.7× more accurate than naive.
- 0.00%
- variance vs the client's manual benchmark across units, revenue, COGS, profit and margin for a control SKU over a month; threshold was 1%
- 2.7×
- more accurate than naive: weekly WAPE on SKUs driving 80% of revenue, 29.6% vs 81.4%. The 25% goal is open: history covers 66.9% of SKUs
Music tech · SaaS
MVP in operation (closed launch)Music releases without missed deadlines
Release ops for independent labels: 9-stage lifecycle, pitching deadlines for 12 stores, AI drafts with human approval. Zero to production-grade in 7 weeks.
- 7 weeks
- from first commit to a production-grade stack with Vault, encrypted backups, SLOs and a move to a Russian data centre (265 commits)
- 16 days
- from project start to an investor presentation with a live product demo
Real estate · PropTech marketplace
MVP in operationLand-plot marketplace with a next-step plan: MVP in 2 months
From a mock-up to a working platform: plot → works → contractor → request. Rule-based next-step engine, three dashboards, personal-data compliance. MVP in 2 months.
- 2 months
- from approved spec to pre-release MVP on an HTTPS stand — week 9 against the plan's own 10–13 week estimate
- 7 days
- from spec to the first full-implementation commit: 168 files, 21.5k lines, then two months of hardening to pre-release
Marketplace e-commerce · Pricing
PilotRepricing without manual price control: a contract-guaranteed pilot
Competitor prices tracked per SKU on the marketplace, a price computed inside an agreed corridor, applied only after confirmation. Pilot: 10 SKUs, setup within 14 days.
- 10 SKUs · 2 scenarios
- pilot scope; the SKU cap and both scenarios are enforced in code and verified by contract tests — the cap cannot be exceeded
- up to 14 days
- contractual setup window from client inputs to launch, then a 1-month pilot; the service tracks the dates and closes access when the period ends
EdTech · HR-tech
MVP in operation (demo stand)From business canvas to a student-work marketplace demo in about six weeks
The client had a business model and no product. We built a student-task marketplace MVP where the server enforces legal and platform rules, and put a demo stand live.
- ~6 weeks
- from first commit to a deployed demo with all workspaces; 7 working days in commit history
- 3 checks
- run by the server before a contractor is assigned: data consent, self-employed status, mentor — each with a plain refusal
Own products and research
What we build for ourselves: platforms, libraries and open research projects — the proving ground for the approaches our clients get.
AI infrastructure / multi-agent systems
In-house productAgent teams assembled by configuration that review their own work
Core of a multi-agent platform built in 2.5 weeks: 29 declarative agents in three teams, agent-critic pairs, shared memory on four databases, five autonomy levels.
- 25,000+
- lines of Python in the platform core across 134 modules, counted from the repository
- 29
- declarative agents in three ready-made teams — engineering, cognitive, research; counted from YAML specs
AI infrastructure / multi-agent systems R&D
Research projectA multi-agent environment where rules are code, not prompts
In four days we built and open-sourced (MIT) an agent environment where constraints are enforced in code: cryptography, Byzantine consensus, reproducible experiments.
- 64 × 10,000
- agents × ticks in the reference experiment: 131,372 events, zero invariant violations; sha256 attestation independently verified
- up to 3.9×
- faster policy tick on the reference load (1,126.7 → 286.5 ms) with bit-identical hashes; measured with the committed profiling script
EdTech / AI research
Research projectLong-term student memory: from hypothesis to a working service
A neuromorphic memory core and cognitive digital twins of students: 32 REST endpoints, 368 tests and formally verified memory convergence — built in a 10-day sprint.
- 10 days
- from first commit to a release with formal verification, measured by commit dates
- 368
- test functions across 37 files, counted from code
Scientific computing / R&D
Research projectFrom mathematical theory to a verified numerical library in 9 months
A compensated-computation library: precision loss is visible and auditable, properties machine-proved in Lean 4, every numeric claim backed by a reproducible benchmark.
- 1.0 instead of 0.0
- residual preserved on the [1e16, 1, −1e16] aggregation that float silently drops; reproducible benchmark artifact in the repository
- ≥10x
- stability ratio vs float64 on catastrophic cancellation; pinned baseline under regression control in CI
EdTech · Mobile app
In-house productA mobile client for an AI learning platform, built without waiting on the backend
Flutter client for an exam-prep platform: adaptive micro-lessons, a streaming AI assistant, a knowledge map. UI built in parallel with the backend via a mock layer.
- 13 weeks
- from first commit to a working app with auth, goals, lessons and AI chat
- 41 → 81 endpoints
- API coverage doubled from MVP to the extended version — 14 → 31 modules on the same architecture
IT consulting · Lead qualification
In-house productA pilot plan for the visitor, a qualified lead for sales
We replaced the contact form with an AI consultant: it interviews the visitor, returns a pilot plan with KPIs and risks, and sales gets a lead with budget and timeline.
- 1 day
- Working MVP — frontend, backend and deploy configs — built in a single day
- 16 days
- From first commit to production with HTTPS and an issued certificate on its own domain
EdTech · Knowledge platforms
StudyNinja and KnowledgeBaseAI
The learning platform and the graph knowledge platform are covered in the Ecosystem section.
Estimate the impact first
Size the payback of automating a similar process before the first call — no commitment, no price of ours.
Estimate the impact with AVAHave a similar task?
Describe the process and the data. Before any work starts we will tell you what can be measured in money and what cannot.
Or write to hello@xteam.pro