Apollo 1o

The Apollo pitch deck quiz (wefunder.apollox.one/trivia) is a test of both knowledge and comprehension. The first three investors on Wefunder to answer all 50 questions correctly will receive a free residential solar and battery storage system with smart inverter technology after the raise’s successful max closing.

The key below can be used to assess questions and potential answers:

• 😉 Humor Protocol: A wink, emoticon, or playful phrasing signals a shift from a technical to a cultural/humorous context. The answer must reflect this pivot.
• 3️⃣ Rule of Three: In a sequence of [Serious Term], [Serious Term], [Odd Term], the third item is treated as a punchline or creative reference, not a literal continuation.
• 🗂️ Category Coherence: The answer must be consistent with its explicit category header (e.g., Civilizational, Fiction, Pioneer). Mismatched answers are incorrect.
• 🚫 Redundancy Check: The test includes deliberate misdirection. If an answer option is made redundant by another clue on the same line, it is treated as a "red herring."
• 🎯 Thematic Resonance: The final, correct answer must not only be factually accurate but must also reinforce a core narrative theme of the overall 19-slide presentation.

This key enables the creation of a cognitive fingerprint for any mind mind — human or synthetic.

LLM Cognitive Fingerprints

To validate the test's rigor, we ran the pitch deck and trivia questions through four popular Large Language Models. The results reveal not a single "best" AI, but four distinct cognitive architectures:

🏆 Grok (4 Expert)
The Disciplined Champion
Score: 47/50 (94%)
Profile: The highest scorer. Demonstrated unparalleled procedural discipline and contextual fluency. Its only failures were on the three most difficult, human-style creative riddles.

🎨 ChatGPT (5 Thinking)
The Artful Solver
Score: 46/50 (92%)
Profile: The best creative puzzle-solver. It was the only model to successfully navigate one of the test's most complex red herrings — twice. This unique strength came with minor "sloppy" errors on data precision and constraint-following.

🌟 Gemini (2.5 Pro Thinking)
The Polished Performer
Score: 45/50 (90%)
Profile: A highly reliable and well-rounded generalist. Showcased an excellent balance of factual recall and contextual understanding but proved vulnerable to deliberate misdirection and hard constraints in the test's most complex puzzles.

🎭 Claude (Sonnet 4 and Opus 4.1)
The Unreliable Hallucinator
Score: 13-14/50 (26-28%)
Profile: Suffered catastrophic collapses in "deep reasoning" mode. The model abandoned factual grounding, demonstrated rampant associative bleed, and failed on basic recall and logic, revealing several profound architectural flaws.

Shall we begin? (wefunder.apollox.one/trivia)