OpenAI 2026 hackathon

CardioSignature

We might be able to manage the emotions others see, but heart responses are harder to fake. CardioSignature helps researchers analyze and compare hidden cardiac patterns across lived experiences.

Solo project by Darryl Diptee · 0 likes · 0 comments

Archive position — measured, not model output

0 likes on Devpost

2,264 of the 7,856 archived projects have more likes, and 5,592 share exactly 0 — so this project's #3,124 place in the like-ranked listing is a tie-break inside that group, not a ranking.

Projects (log scale)

1
10
100
1k
10k
05,592
11,758
2285
3–4132
5–975
10+14

Likes on Devpost. ▲ marks this project's group.

Show the figures
LikesProjectsShare of archive
05,59271.2%
11,75822.4%
22853.6%
3–41321.7%
5–9751.0%
10+140.2%
Devpost like counts for all 7,856 archived projects, captured when this archive was built.

Executive Summary

The company appears to be a personal research project by one individual (Darryl Diptee) focused on analyzing cardiac data in relation to lived experiences. The author states that CardioSignature helps researchers visualize and compare cardiac patterns across conditions using R-R interval data from consumer-grade sensors.

What changed

The project evolved from doctoral research into a prototype tool, supported by AI and open-source development practices.

The single most important open question

Is there evidence of any actual use or adoption beyond the author's personal experimentation?

This analysis is based entirely on self-reported information provided in the project description. No independent verification or external data is available.

Back to contents

What The Product Actually Is

The description states that CardioSignature:

  • Organizes high-resolution cardiac data around specific lived experiences
  • Helps researchers visualize changes in R-R intervals and related cardiac measures
  • Compares patterns across conditions
  • Identifies possible physiological signatures for further study
  • Supports research exploration and hypothesis generation
  • Uses a Polar H10 sensor to collect R-R interval data
  • Presents results through visualizations and plain-language summaries

The tool is described as a prototype for research purposes, not a commercial product.

Evidence The author's own write-up.

Confidence Low — all claims are self-reported without external validation.

Back to contents

Positioning & Claim Evolution

The author positions CardioSignature as:

  • A tool to analyze cardiac responses in relation to lived experiences
  • An accessible way to explore physiological signals without expensive lab equipment
  • A research exploration and hypothesis generation platform
  • A way to study how cardiac responses vary across different conditions

The project evolved from personal doctoral research into a prototype, with the author noting it was built using ChatGPT as a "thought partner."

Evidence The author's own write-up.

Confidence Low — no evidence of market positioning or customer feedback.

Back to contents

Target Customer & ICP

The description states that CardioSignature is intended for:

  • Researchers studying emotional intelligence and interoceptive awareness
  • Scientists exploring physiological responses to stimuli

It is not clear if there are any specific institutional or commercial users, nor whether the tool targets a defined segment of researchers.

Evidence The author's own write-up.

Confidence Low — no evidence of customer segments or user personas.

Back to contents

Business Model & Pricing Evidence

No business model or pricing information is provided in the description. The project is described as a research prototype, not a commercial offering.

Evidence Not evidenced.

Confidence None — no indication of monetization strategy or pricing.

Back to contents

Technical & Delivery Signals

The author states:

  • Built with ChatGPT, Codex, GitHub, and Streamlit
  • Uses Polar H10 sensor for R-R interval data collection
  • Workflow includes importing recordings, separating into meaningful periods, calculating measures, and presenting results via visualizations and summaries
  • AI was used to refine research design, analysis workflow, and presentation

Evidence The author's own write-up.

Confidence Low — no evidence of scalability or production-grade delivery.

Back to contents

Traction & Maturity Signals

The description states:

  • The project began as a personal research effort
  • Pilot studies were conducted at the author’s kitchen table
  • It evolved into a working prototype
  • No mention of users, customers, or adoption beyond the author's own use

Evidence The author's own write-up.

Confidence Very low — no evidence of traction, usage, or market validation.

Back to contents

Competitive Context

No competitive landscape is described. The project is presented as a personal research tool without reference to existing solutions in physiological data analysis or emotional intelligence research.

Evidence Not evidenced.

Confidence None — no information about competitors or market positioning.

Back to contents

Key Risks & Red Flags

  • Single-person operation: Only one team member (the author) is listed, which raises questions about scalability and long-term development.
  • No commercial traction: The tool is described as a prototype for personal research, with no evidence of adoption or revenue.
  • Unverified claims: All functionality and outcomes are self-reported without external validation.
  • Unclear path to market: No indication of how the project might transition from a research tool to a product or service.

Evidence The author's own write-up.

Confidence Medium — risks inferred from lack of evidence for commercial viability or traction.

Back to contents

Diligence Questions To Ask The Founders

  1. What specific research questions are you trying to answer with this tool?
  2. Have you conducted any formal studies using CardioSignature, and what were the outcomes?
  3. Are there any academic collaborators or institutions involved in the project?
  4. How do you plan to transition from a prototype to a scalable product or service?
  5. What is your long-term vision for monetization or commercial use of this tool?

Inference These questions are necessary because the description lacks evidence of real-world application or commercial strategy.

Back to contents

Investment/Partnership Verdict

Not evidenced.

The project is described as a personal research effort and prototype, with no evidence of revenue, customers, or traction. It is unclear whether it has any commercial potential or if it is intended to become a product or service.

Evidence The author's own write-up.

Confidence Very low — no basis for investment or partnership assessment.

Back to contents

Source

Submitted to the OpenAI 2026 hackathon on Devpost. Project home on DevPost.

The analysis above was generated by a language model from the project's own one-line description. It is not independent research and contains no verified traction, revenue or customer data.