E3 · cycle-001.e3-kor-greedy-marginal-30y

South Korea, greedy, 30 years

100 simulations of 30 rounds from the 2026 position. South Korea decides by the greedy method; the shock and upside library, drawn at random each round.

Model 0.1.0 · graph 0.2.0 · parameters 0.1.0 · seeds 1–100 · elasticity sampled within each bracket

Every simulation · Compare with another experiment · More experiments like this

Not a forecast

Simulations of a structural model with seed parameter values, to compare methods and test the model. Other nations stay at their 2026 ratings throughout.

Outcome across simulations

The median at 2056, with the 10th to the 90th percentile of the 100 simulations under it.

Capability index: 18.08 (+2.07); From 16.00; 17.77 to 18.44
Rank by index: 1; From 6; 1 to 2
Domains at Tier 1: 7; From 2; 7 to 7
Tier rank: 2; From 7; 2 to 2

Capability index by round

Rank by index, by round

Every objective at the position and at the horizon
Objective	2026	10th percentile	Median	90th percentile	Better
Capability indexprimary	16.00	17.77	18.08	18.44	higher
Rank by index	6	1	1	2	lower
Tier rank	7	2	2	2	lower
Domains at Tier 1	2	7	7	7	higher
Score sum	1165.8	1285.9	1307.3	1332.6	higher
Goal-weighted score	1165.8	1285.9	1307.3	1332.6	higher
Resilient score	1165.8	1307.7 (mean score sum over the simulations)			higher

The capability index is the mean of the three dimensions, each the mean of its domains, each the mean of its groups. Tiers are Pareto layers within each domain; the tier rank orders nations by domains held at Tier 1, then Tier 2, and so on. The goal-weighted score is the score sum unless the experiment sets a goal. The primary objective is the one the experiment is judged on; every other objective is reported beside it.

Credits

What each round’s credits went on in the median simulation. Across all simulations, build took 64 per cent, buy took 15 per cent, partner took 21 per cent of the 3,891 credits a simulation spent on actions.

Report

Written from the simulation record by the loop's narrator. Every figure names the query it came from, in square brackets.

Batch cycle-001. Model 0.1.0, graph 0.2.0, parameters 0.1.0. 100 simulations, seeds 1 to 100; probes on 20. Every figure is a distribution over simulations of a structural model with seed parameter values; it shows what the model implies under these settings, not what will happen. Other nations are frozen at their 2026 ratings. No reconstructed historical data is used in this experiment.

Headline

South Korea played 30 rounds from 2026 under the greedy marginal method, with stochastic events, 100 times. Its capability index moved from 16.00 to a median of 18.08 (+2.07), with 90 per cent of simulations between 17.71 and 18.50 [experiment_objectives].

Starting position

In 2026 the nation ranks 6 on the index against the frozen field, holds 2 of nine domains at Tier 1 and has a tier rank of 7. Its base income is 888 credits a year, calibrated so that its 2026 position is affordable with headroom for investment.

What was decided

A simulation spent a median of 3,729 credits on moves. The five groups that took most were Transparency, Oversight & Accountability (build, 139 credits, 3.6 per cent); Technical & Vocational Skills (build, 133 credits, 3.4 per cent); Lifelong Learning & Reskilling (build, 123 credits, 3.1 per cent); Political Institutions & Civic Participation (build, 118 credits, 3.0 per cent); Public Integrity & Anti-Corruption (build, 112 credits, 2.9 per cent) [experiment_decisions_by_group]. By mode: build 59 per cent, buy 23 per cent, partner 18 per cent [experiment_decisions_by_group]. Concentration of spending (HHI) had a median of 0.023, and the most repeated action appeared in 10 per cent of rounds.

The leading domain by period: rounds 1 to 5, Human Capital; rounds 6 to 10, Governance & Integrity; rounds 11 to 15, Production & Innovation; rounds 16 to 20, Strategic Infrastructure; rounds 21 to 25, Critical Technology; rounds 26 to 30, Critical Technology [experiment_spend_by_period].

The method's chosen action was within 5 per cent of its best alternative in 89 per cent of moves and ahead by more than 25 per cent in 0 per cent [experiment_decision_margins].

What the world did

A median simulation saw 4 shocks and 2 upside events. The most damaging per firing were S03 (48 firings in 40 simulations, −28.1 points each); S09 (10 firings in 10 simulations, −23.7 points each); S07 (19 firings in 18 simulations, −23.6 points each) [experiment_shocks]. Upside events fired 237 times across all simulations [experiment_shocks].

The groups that lost most to shocks, per simulation: Economic Leverage & Dependence −1.58; Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance −1.55; Trade Facilitation & Logistics −1.55; Information Environment & Strategic Communication −1.44 [experiment_shock_damage_by_group].

The edges that carried most change through the graph, per simulation: Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance to Social Infrastructure (+0.50 points); Research Talent & Knowledge Creation to Innovation & Commercialisation (+0.62 points); Research Talent & Knowledge Creation to Quantum Technologies (+0.60 points) [experiment_propagation_by_edge].

Where it ended

At 2056 the median rank is 1 (5th to 95th percentile 1 to 2), the median count of Tier 1 domains 7 (6 to 7) and the median tier rank 2; the resilient score, the mean score sum over simulations, is 1,308 [experiment_objectives].

Tier 1 probability changed most in: financial strength (0 to 100 per cent of simulations); governance and integrity (0 to 100 per cent of simulations); information and influence (0 to 100 per cent of simulations); strategic infrastructure (0 to 91 per cent of simulations); trade and investment (0 to 100 per cent of simulations) [experiment_tiers_by_round].

Why

Without shocks the index ends +0.157 higher on average, so the shocks cost about 0.157 index points [experiment_probe_attribution].

Holding instead of following this method changes the index by −2.950: that is the method's worth against doing nothing [experiment_probe_attribution].

Removing any single one of the five largest actions changes the index by between −0.015 and −0.003, for example 2056 buy Artificial Intelligence (54 credits) [experiment_probe_attribution]. The largest actions by credits come late, when income is highest, and are rarely the most valuable.

Removing the largest shock of a simulation raises the index by +0.035 on average [experiment_probe_attribution].

The replay probe reproduces the simulations exactly (index change 0.000000), so the attributions are clean [experiment_probe_attribution].

Surprises

move_without_shock (warn): largest one-year move in a group with no shock landing: 3.11 points; 4% of simulations have one above 3.

tier_jump (warn): largest gain in one domain within five years: 6 tiers (100 simulations above 2).

saturation_high (warn): 47% of simulations end with a group at 20 that did not start there (median 0 groups).

retired_words (warn): e3-kor-greedy-marginal-30y/report.md: 'simulations' 3 time(s), first near line 40; use 'simulations'.

The simulation furthest from the median (seed 83) ends −0.81 from it, with 6 shocks and 3 upside events [experiment_outlier_simulations].

Comparison

Against the hold experiment for the same nation (e0-null-kor), the median index is +11.86 points apart, the median rank 1 against 94, and Tier 1 domains 7 against 0 [experiment_against_hold].

No backcast comparison: this experiment does not start from a historical position [experiment_against_history].

What each decision and shock was worth

Counterfactual probes on the first 20 seeds: the same simulations with one thing changed, paired seed by seed. A removed decision or shock is taken out and the other decisions replayed unchanged, so the difference is that item's worth.

Probe	Index	Score sum	Tier 1	For example
Hold instead of the method	−2.950	−202.9	−5.65
No shocks	+0.157	+11.3	−0.05
Replay of the recorded actions (must change nothing)	0.000	0.0	0.00
Without the 1st largest decision	−0.012	−0.8	0.00	2056 buy Artificial Intelligence (54 credits)
Without the 2nd largest decision	−0.010	−0.7	0.00	2055 buy Strategic Strike & Missile Defence (54 credits)
Without the 3rd largest decision	−0.003	−0.2	0.00	2054 buy Force Generation & Mobilisation (53 credits)
Without the 4th largest decision	−0.013	−0.9	0.00	2054 buy Space Operations (53 credits)
Without the 5th largest decision	−0.015	−1.0	0.00	2045 partner Alliances & Security Cooperation (53 credits)
Without the 1st largest shock	−0.035	−1.4	−0.10	2039 S03 (-38.8 points)
Without the 2nd largest shock	+0.035	+2.2	−0.12	2049 S03 (-31.5 points)
Without the 3rd largest shock	−0.006	−0.7	−0.14	2038 S03 (-25.8 points)

Simulations

Three simulations told round by round, each on its own page: the one nearest the median index at the horizon, and those nearest the 10th and the 90th percentile. Every one of the 100 is listed with its outcome on the simulations page.

All 100 simulations

Events

How often each shock and upside event began across the simulations. Shocks come from the ten downside scenarios and upside events from the ten upside ones, at their yearly likelihood.

Event	Kind	Simulations	Mean round	Points
Hybrid coercion S04	Shock	53 per cent	14.2	−17.9
AI labour shock S08	Shock	49 per cent	17.5	−17.3
Regional war spillover S03	Shock	40 per cent	15.4	−28.1
Water-efficient food leap S16	Upside	38 per cent	15.6	+13.3
Global funding seizure S02	Shock	37 per cent	15.4	−10.5
Clean power threshold S15	Upside	37 per cent	17.4	+31.6
Trade bloc rupture S01	Shock	34 per cent	14.7	−21.3
Breadbasket failure S06	Shock	33 per cent	14.3	−10.3
Chronic disease advance S19	Upside	31 per cent	16.5	+16.3
Market access opening S12	Upside	31 per cent	14.9	+17.6
Automated discovery step S17	Upside	31 per cent	16.7	+41.6
Core disaster S07	Shock	18 per cent	13.6	−23.6
Cryptographic trust break S09	Shock	10 per cent	12.0	−23.7
Legitimacy rupture S05	Shock	9 per cent	13.0	−8.8
Middle East settlement S14	Upside	9 per cent	15.5	+15.7
Outbreak defence succeeds S20	Upside	8 per cent	8.9	+32.6
Great-power détente S13	Upside	6 per cent	14.5	+24.5
Severe pandemic S10	Shock	6 per cent	18.8	−22.5
Debt service reset S11	Upside	6 per cent	18.5	+2.0
Public service leap S18	Upside	5 per cent	20.4	+13.6

Groups across simulations

Every capability group: its position, and its median and spread at the horizon across the simulations, with what the method spent on it.

Find a group

Domain

73 of 73 groups

Capability group	Domain	2026	2056	Change	Levels invested	Credits
Public Integrity & Anti-Corruption	Governance & Integrity	15.00	19.85 19.04 to 20.00	+4.85	4.29	112
Resource Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	11.75	16.54 15.34 to 18.01	+4.79	4.93	110
Development Cooperation & Global Assistance	Information & Influence	14.50	19.13 18.54 to 19.58	+4.63	5.02	95
Transparency, Oversight & Accountability	Governance & Integrity	15.33	19.92 19.54 to 20.00	+4.59	5.17	139
Justice System & Fundamental Rights	Governance & Integrity	15.00	19.46 18.70 to 19.96	+4.46	4.14	110
Technical & Vocational Skills	Human Capital	15.50	19.93 19.74 to 20.00	+4.43	9.56	133
Diplomatic Statecraft & Global Networks	Information & Influence	14.50	18.83 18.11 to 19.39	+4.33	5.03	98
Population Health	Human Capital	16.00	19.92 18.99 to 20.00	+3.92	3.76	90
Lifelong Learning & Reskilling	Human Capital	16.00	19.88 19.61 to 20.00	+3.88	8.12	123
Political Institutions & Civic Participation	Governance & Integrity	16.00	19.87 19.45 to 20.00	+3.87	4.21	118
Research Talent & Knowledge Creation	Human Capital	16.00	19.86 19.44 to 20.00	+3.86	3.77	120
Sovereign Capital & External Financial Power	Financial Strength	14.20	17.98 17.13 to 18.72	+3.78	4.04	86
Labour & Employment	Production & Innovation	15.00	18.65 17.50 to 19.74	+3.65	4.06	86
Regulatory Governance & Strategic Controls	Governance & Integrity	16.33	19.86 19.24 to 20.00	+3.53	3.57	100
Financial Regulation & Integrity	Financial Strength	15.75	19.28 17.83 to 19.90	+3.53	3.69	90
Economic Leverage & Dependence	Trade & Investment	15.33	18.85 17.97 to 19.71	+3.52	4.24	79
Alliances & Security Cooperation	Information & Influence	16.00	19.27 18.68 to 19.81	+3.27	4.08	60
Artificial Intelligence	Critical Technology	16.00	19.07 18.47 to 19.76	+3.07	3.28	63
Investment Attraction & Projection	Trade & Investment	16.33	19.38 18.49 to 19.80	+3.05	3.29	66
Economic Output & Productivity	Production & Innovation	16.50	19.52 18.94 to 19.95	+3.02	3.49	92
Internal Security & Order	Governance & Integrity	15.67	18.65 17.17 to 19.96	+2.98	2.57	63
Business Dynamism & Entrepreneurship	Production & Innovation	15.75	18.67 17.62 to 19.80	+2.92	3.17	71
Digital & AI Competence	Human Capital	17.00	19.90 19.62 to 20.00	+2.90	4.85	89
Advanced Education	Human Capital	17.00	19.89 19.63 to 20.00	+2.89	3.57	89
Financial Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	16.50	19.35 18.41 to 19.95	+2.85	3.11	69
Health System Capability	Human Capital	16.67	19.51 18.22 to 20.00	+2.84	2.38	72
Early Childhood Development	Human Capital	17.00	19.69 19.06 to 20.00	+2.69	2.35	58
Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance	Financial Strength	16.50	19.18 18.55 to 19.93	+2.68	3.16	122
Information Environment & Strategic Communication	Information & Influence	15.67	18.33 17.62 to 19.29	+2.66	3.70	76
Industrial & Sectoral Base	Production & Innovation	16.50	19.10 18.02 to 19.82	+2.60	2.92	73
Digital & Services Trade	Trade & Investment	16.25	18.83 18.14 to 19.69	+2.58	3.26	64
Government Effectiveness & Public Administration	Governance & Integrity	17.20	19.72 18.76 to 20.00	+2.52	2.06	67
Trade Policy & Market Access	Trade & Investment	17.00	19.42 18.89 to 19.97	+2.42	3.10	50
Connectivity, Cyber & Trust Technologies	Critical Technology	16.60	18.91 18.30 to 19.45	+2.31	2.76	55
Foundational Education	Human Capital	17.25	19.52 18.96 to 20.00	+2.27	1.85	48
Export Capability & Sophistication	Trade & Investment	17.00	19.12 18.39 to 19.79	+2.12	2.58	56
Structural Transformation & Complexity	Production & Innovation	16.67	18.70 17.78 to 19.65	+2.03	2.41	58
Sensing, Timing & Navigation	Critical Technology	15.80	17.70 15.99 to 18.73	+1.90	1.83	41
Culture, Language & Education Diplomacy	Information & Influence	16.80	18.70 18.19 to 19.31	+1.90	2.29	53
Space, Aerospace & Defence Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	16.33	18.16 17.58 to 18.89	+1.83	1.86	58
Global Value Chain Position	Trade & Investment	17.33	19.11 18.43 to 19.71	+1.78	2.37	55
Trade Facilitation & Logistics	Trade & Investment	17.50	19.19 18.26 to 19.96	+1.69	2.38	55
Space Technologies	Critical Technology	14.67	16.36 14.92 to 17.21	+1.69	1.63	45
Technology Adoption & Diffusion	Production & Innovation	18.00	19.50 18.69 to 20.00	+1.50	1.40	35
Monetary & Currency Capability	Financial Strength	16.33	17.79 16.74 to 18.99	+1.46	2.02	52
Diaspora & Global Communities	Information & Influence	15.50	16.90 15.52 to 18.18	+1.40	2.01	46
Biotechnology & Health Technologies	Critical Technology	16.20	17.56 16.75 to 18.48	+1.36	0.92	21
Financial System Depth & Access	Financial Strength	17.00	18.27 17.08 to 19.31	+1.27	1.40	37
Energy Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	16.13	17.33 16.23 to 18.37	+1.20	1.45	41
Robotics & Autonomous Systems	Critical Technology	16.50	17.57 16.62 to 18.75	+1.07	0.98	23
National Resilience & Crisis Management	Governance & Integrity	16.20	17.27 16.12 to 19.05	+1.07	0.94	23
Communications & Digital Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	18.00	19.00 18.26 to 19.76	+1.00	1.16	35
Energy Technologies	Critical Technology	16.60	17.47 16.72 to 18.60	+0.87	0.90	21
Advanced Materials & Manufacturing	Critical Technology	16.71	17.55 16.84 to 18.75	+0.84	0.81	19
Innovation & Commercialisation	Production & Innovation	18.00	18.75 17.78 to 19.56	+0.75	0.01	0
Transport Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	16.50	17.08 16.09 to 18.33	+0.58	0.67	18
Water, Sanitation & Waste Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	16.80	17.28 16.50 to 18.46	+0.48	0.56	16
Social Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	17.00	17.46 16.48 to 18.50	+0.46	0.00	0
Advanced Manufacturing	Strategic Infrastructure	18.40	18.75 18.00 to 19.61	+0.35	0.04	1
Quantum Technologies	Critical Technology	14.25	14.53 13.86 to 15.19	+0.28	0.00	0
Financial Stability & Crisis Management	Financial Strength	16.67	16.93 16.10 to 18.17	+0.26	0.73	18
Semiconductors & Advanced Computing	Critical Technology	17.50	17.53 16.63 to 18.30	+0.03	0.04	1
Agriculture & Food Infrastructure	Strategic Infrastructure	15.75	15.57 14.78 to 16.70	−0.18	0.00	0
Space Operations	National Security	13.67	13.43 12.93 to 13.99	−0.24	0.21	5
Cyber & Electromagnetic Operations	National Security	16.00	15.70 15.03 to 16.93	−0.30	0.50	12
Intelligence & Assessment	National Security	15.83	15.51 14.87 to 16.67	−0.32	0.59	13
Force Generation & Mobilisation	National Security	16.33	15.99 15.54 to 16.48	−0.34	0.10	3
Air Power	National Security	16.75	16.33 15.79 to 16.76	−0.42	0.00	0
Nuclear Deterrence	National Security	1.67	1.09 0.38 to 1.79	−0.58	0.00	0
Land Power	National Security	16.50	15.89 15.29 to 16.38	−0.61	0.00	0
Strategic Strike & Missile Defence	National Security	16.00	15.38 14.56 to 15.81	−0.62	0.02	1
Joint Command, Projection & Sustainment	National Security	15.33	14.63 13.82 to 15.21	−0.70	0.02	1
Maritime Power	National Security	16.00	15.05 13.96 to 15.68	−0.95	0.02	1

Checks

The automated checks run on this experiment before anything was written about it. A warning is a candidate finding for the improvement loop.

passcredits_conservedlargest gap between credits in and credits accounted for: 2.3e-13
passscores_in_boundsscores range 0.000 to 20.000
passno_nans0 missing values in the trajectory and objectives
passprobe_replay_reproducesthe recorded moves played back reproduce the simulation to within 0.0e+00 points (20 simulations)
passledger_balancesthe edge ledger sums to the propagated change to within 1.5e-06 points
warnmove_without_shocklargest one-year move in a group with no shock landing: 3.11 points; 4% of simulations have one above 3
warntier_jumplargest gain in one domain within five years: 6 tiers (100 simulations above 2)
passall_tier1_from_outside_top10starting rank 6; 0 simulations reach Tier 1 in all nine domains
warnsaturation_high47% of simulations end with a group at 20 that did not start there (median 0 groups)
passsaturation_low2% of simulations end with a group at 0 that did not start there (median 0 groups)
passspend_concentrationmedian concentration of spending across groups (HHI) 0.023; most funded group soft.governance_and_integrity.transparency_oversight_and_accountability
passsame_actionthe most repeated move (group and mode) appears in a median 10% of rounds

Settings and versions

Experiment cycle-001.e3-kor-greedy-marginal-30y. Every simulation records the model, graph and parameter versions, the scenario, the method and its seed, so it can be reproduced exactly.

Nation: South Korea (KOR)
Position: The 2026 ratings of the National Capability Index
Method: Greedy. Each round, the actions with the most value per credit: a level's own worth plus its long-run effect downstream through the graph, less the maintenance it will need, counting only what arrives before the horizon.
Scenario: The shock and upside library, drawn at random each round
Objective: Capability index, the primary objective the experiment is judged on; every other objective is reported beside it
Horizon: 30 rounds, 2026 to 2056
Simulations: 100 seeds, 1 to 100. Every method in the batch faces the same draws for the same seed.
Graph elasticities: Drawn for each simulation, uniformly within each edge’s bracket
Income: Base credits 888.4 a round, moving with the economic groups
Versions: Model 0.1.0, Capability Dependency Graph 0.2.0, parameters 0.1.0
Batch: Improvement cycle (cycle-001), cycle 1 of the improvement loop
Runtime: 8.7 seconds in all; 905 microseconds a round

Not a forecast: Every figure is a distribution over the simulations of a structural model, reported to compare methods and test the model. None is a prediction of what a nation will do or become.
Structural parameters: Costs, decay, vulnerability and credits are structural seed values with low or medium confidence, set by domain with single-group exceptions. Five groups have no defensible value in a single-nation model and are flagged in the parameter tables.
Other nations are frozen: One nation is simulated at a time. Every other nation stays at its 2026 rating, so rank and tiers are measured against a still field; where the simulated nation rises past others their own tiers are not re-sorted.
Starting depth and mode are defaults: The position is the National Capability Index ratings. How institutionalised each capability is, and how much was built, bought or partnered, have no data behind them yet and start from structural defaults.
Credits are calibrated, not measured: Each nation’s income is set so that its position is affordable with headroom that rises with its fiscal capacity. It is not yet fiscal capacity as a share of GDP.