# Axiom Cortex pricing and packaging

> Reference packaging for early access. Final price and service scope are confirmed with the buyer before candidate data is processed.

Axiom Cortex prices access to a completed technical interview evaluation and its alignment method, not tokens, individual questions, or a pass/fail recommendation. The package is built around the review workflow: role criteria, the full interview record, evidence, gaps, and a qualified human decision.

## Why this is a new category

Axiom Cortex is positioned as neuro-psychometric alignment intelligence for technical hiring. It maps observable work reasoning to the requirements of a specific role, using a controlled chain from role criteria to attributable source evidence to visible gaps and human release.

Interview recorders, transcription tools, coding assessments, and generic AI assistants can be useful alongside this workflow, but they do not provide the same method by default. A summary can make an interview easier to read; it cannot establish a governed role-alignment result without the role map, evidence lock, configured calculation, uncertainty controls, and qualified human review.

“Neuro-psychometric” is public product language for an evidence-bound model of observable work reasoning. It does not mean brain measurement, clinical diagnosis, personality testing, intelligence testing, or a guarantee of better hiring outcomes.

## What one evaluation means

One evaluation is one complete interview transcript, one candidate, and one role or blueprint version. It includes every question and the full-interview synthesis. New interview evidence or a materially different role or blueprint version is a new evaluation.

The reference model does not bill per question, individual B-Axiom, token, reviewer seat, or pass/fail recommendation. Prepaid credits have a defined validity period, and automatic replenishment is optional. Overage or a new purchase requires agreement, while system failures or corrections of the same result are not treated as new evaluations.

## Usage-first purchase options

These are proposed commercial structures, not public checkout prices or current customer contracts. Company size does not determine the package; quantity, purchase frequency, value per evaluation, and delivery requirements do.

| Purchase option | Quantity | Proposed commercial structure | Scope boundary |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| **Single evaluation** | 1 interview | **$29 one time** at the highest unit price | Same complete assessment; no subscription required |
| **Small pack** | 10, 25, or 50 interviews | Prepaid evaluations with a modest volume discount | Defined validity period and source requirements |
| **Business batch** | 100, 250, or 500 interviews | Lower unit pricing based on purchased quantity | Usage period and review path agreed before purchase |
| **Bulk commitment** | 1,000, 5,000, or 10,000+ interviews | Negotiated volume pricing with a usage period and payment commitment | Lower unit price through volume and commitment |
| **Enterprise or embedded use** | Actual requirements | Evaluation pricing plus separately scoped deployment, support, integration, or distribution rights | Enterprise status alone does not add a platform fee |

The same core methodology and complete assessment belong in every package. Buying fewer evaluations does not mean receiving weaker analysis.

## Proof paths

- **Guided Proof Pack:** $499, 25 evaluations, 30 days, one role, and up to 45 minutes of combined kickoff and readout. It is bounded onboarding, not manual report production.
- **Enterprise proof of value:** $2,500, 100 evaluations, 45 days, two roles, bounded setup, and a buyer ROI readout. It is a negotiated evaluation plan, not a statistical validity claim.

## 125-evaluation premium pack test

The first pack test is **$1,499 one time for 125 evaluations**, approximately $11.99 per evaluation. It keeps the complete evaluation scope constant while testing whether buyers will pay a premium for the method and its decision evidence. It is a campaign pack, not a required monthly subscription. A repeat buyer may choose automatic replenishment, but that remains optional.

For a purchased batch, use the buyer's actual usage in the value model:

`ROI = (value from evaluations actually used - total purchase and implementation cost) / total purchase and implementation cost`

Unused evaluations remain in the cost denominator. The model must not assume that every credit was used or turn capacity value into automatic cash savings.

The decision should use actual buying behavior: quoted-to-paid conversion, evaluations purchased and used, unused credits, support effort, time to first useful result, repeat purchase or optional replenishment, and buyer-reported decision value. A positive reaction to the price is not enough evidence.

## Larger-client scope

For any buyer, start with the quantity and project requirements before discussing a larger commitment. The scope should name the role families, expected volume, transcript path, reviewer and release responsibilities, security questions, retention terms, usage period, and the evidence the buyer will use to judge the workflow.

An enterprise or embedded agreement can add SSO, integrations, dedicated hosting, localization, white-label rights, API access, tenant isolation, service levels, residency terms, support, or downstream distribution rights when the capability is verified and the term is explicitly contracted. Those charges correspond to actual requirements, not company size. Essential source evidence, correction, and human-decision controls are not premium-only features.

## Economic framing

The buyer model uses capacity value as a planning lens. It starts with the buyer's own review minutes, loaded labor cost, usage, setup effort, and other incremental costs. Capacity value is not automatically cash savings, and a time-saving assumption must be measured after reading, verification, correction, and follow-up.

Outcome upside stays separate and off by default. The public model does not claim better hiring, lower turnover, causal savings, or predictive validity. Buyers should run a defined proof with comparable roles, explicit criteria, a measurement window, and a human review process.

## Transcript and source requirements

The buyer supplies the job context, role requirements, must-haves, approved questions, ideal-answer criteria, and an authorized full interview record. A quality transcript should preserve speaker labels, timestamps, technical terms, unclear spans, and the original recording beside it.

If the recording needs transcription, use an authorized local or hosted path and verify the export against the source. A cleaned transcript cannot establish how an answer was delivered. Speech-pattern changes can be review prompts, but they are not standalone proof of AI use, deception, or eligibility.

## Public boundary

Public pages describe usage-first options, the proposed $29 single evaluation, the 125-evaluation premium pack test, and the buyer workflow. They do not expose proprietary formulas, weights, thresholds, score anchors, calibration logic, private prompts, candidate data, customer data, or hidden implementation details. A qualified human reviewer remains responsible for inspecting the evidence and making the final employment decision.

See [who Axiom Cortex is for](https://axiomcx.dev/knowledge/who-is-this-for.md), the [public pricing page](https://axiomcx.dev/pricing/), and the [public claim boundary](https://axiomcx.dev/knowledge/public-claim-boundary.md).