About us

About Deep Science DD

Hadrien Depernet - Founder

PhD in Biophysics (Structural Biology). Two master degrees: Biotechnology and Business Administration. I perform scientific due diligence for venture capital and private equity investors focused on biotech and pharma.

Our approach

Deep Science DD uses a literature-first due diligence method. We systematically mine the public scientific record that predates a startup. Those publications capture the experiments, methods, statistics and independent validations on which a technology rests. We use that record to evaluate the strength and maturity of the underlying science before recommending next steps.

Key elements we assess in every review:

  • Statistical rigor and experimental design.

  • Peer-review quality and journal context.

  • Main findings and effect sizes.

  • Limitations, caveats and unstated assumptions.

  • Reproducibility and independent validation.

  • Comparison to prior art and alternative strategies.

  • Unaddressed research gaps and key experiments missing.

Why this matters for investors

Most biotech startups arise from academic research groups. The core discoveries are already in the public domain as papers, patents and conference abstracts. Examining that history quickly reveals whether the science is robust, incremental, or speculative. A focused literature-based review can:

  • Surface fatal methodological flaws before you invest.

  • Reveal where independent replication is lacking.

  • Clarify whether claimed mechanisms are supported by strong evidence.

  • Flag downstream obstacles such as manufacturability or translational gaps.

This method is time- and cost-efficient. It provides a rapid scientific health-check. It is not a replacement for full commercial- and legal-due diligence. It is a high-leverage filter that tells you whether to proceed to deeper, resource-intensive investigation.

Typical report structure

Our reports follow a ten-part structure so investors receive consistent, actionable output:

  1. Executive Summary

  2. Company and Technology Overview

  3. Scientific Validation

  4. Intellectual Property

  5. Regulatory Status

  6. Manufacturing and Quality Control

  7. Market and Competitive Analysis

  8. Team Assessment

  9. Risk Assessment

  10. Conclusion and Recommendations

Example (illustrative)

A startup claims a novel antibody scaffold based on three preclinical papers from the founding lab. Our literature review found small animal cohorts, limited statistical reporting, and no independent replication. The IP landscape showed several earlier patents on similar scaffolds. Recommendation: decline or finance a targeted replication study and secure freedom-to-operate analysis before follow-up funding.

Limitations

A literature-first review cannot access proprietary data, internal assays, non-public experiments or up-to-the-minute financials. It may miss recent, unpublished breakthroughs held in the company lab. When the literature suggests promise we recommend targeted follow-up: data-room access, company interviews, CRO replication or in-house experiments.

Deliverable and engagement

You receive a concise, evidence-backed report with clear red flags, open questions and recommended next steps. Reports are written for investment committees and technical partners.

For inquiries and commissioning contact Hadrien Depernet via the Deep Science DD contact page.

 

Deep Science DD: science-driven diligence that filters risk before you spend time and capital.