Scenario generation
When you submit a decision, PreRipple doesn't search for one correct answer. It constructs several internally consistent ways the decision could unfold, each built on a different level of commitment and risk. Each scenario is written out as a narrative with projected effects across finance, career, time, health, and relationships, so the paths can be read against each other.
The generation step uses a large language model working from the decision you described, the context you chose to share, and general knowledge about how decisions of that type tend to play out. It does not query live market data, your bank, your employer, or public records.
The three-future framework
Every simulation resolves into the same three conceptual paths. Holding the framework constant is deliberate: it makes different decisions comparable, and it keeps the output from collapsing into a single recommendation.
| Pathway | Posture | Typically trades… |
|---|---|---|
| Stable Buffer | Conservative — preserve security, prepare, move later | Time and momentum for safety |
| Balanced Flight | Staged — partial commitment that tests the decision | Speed and simplicity for optionality |
| Leap of Faith | High commitment — move fully and quickly | Security for upside and speed |
Inputs
Results vary with what you supply. Two people asking the same question with different Life Models will get different scenarios, and the same person will get different scenarios after updating their details. In Generic mode, no personal data is used at all, so the output is necessarily broader and less specific.
PreRipple cannot verify your inputs. Approximate or out-of-date numbers will produce approximate or out-of-date scenarios.
Assumptions
Every scenario rests on assumptions — about timing, costs, how long income takes to arrive, how stable a situation stays, how people around you respond. Some are drawn from what you wrote; others are filled in by the model because a coherent scenario needs them. Where an assumption is doing heavy lifting, the useful move is to change it and re-run the simulation to see how much the conclusion depends on it.
Confidence and comparative indicators
Where PreRipple shows a confidence or success indicator, it expresses how the model rates one pathway relative to the others in the same simulation, given the assumptions in play. It is a ranking aid, not a measurement.
What the percentages are — and are not
Figures such as "success 64%" or "regret 28%" are model-generated comparative indicators. They are:
- useful for ranking the three pathways against each other;
- useful for noticing when one path is markedly more exposed;
- not measured real-world probabilities;
- not derived from a validated statistical model of your outcome;
- not odds you should plan finances or health decisions around.
Any percentages shown on this website are illustrative examples of the product interface, not results for a real person.
Limitations
- The future cannot be predicted, and PreRipple does not attempt to.
- Unexpected events — job loss, illness, market movements, family changes — can invalidate any scenario.
- Incomplete or inaccurate inputs produce weaker scenarios.
- AI systems can make mistakes, including confident-sounding ones. Check anything that matters.
- Scenarios are decision-support material. They belong alongside your own research and, for financial, medical, legal, or tax matters, professional advice.
The full statement of what PreRipple can and cannot tell you is on the accuracy and limitations page.