Batch cycle-003. Model 0.2.0, graph 0.2.0, parameters 0.1.1. 30 simulations, seeds 1 to 30; probes on 10. 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
Saudi Arabia played 30 rounds from 1996 under the scripted method, with scripted events, 30 times. Its capability index moved from 11.02 to a median of 11.17 (+0.15), with 90 per cent of simulations between 11.16 and 11.19 [experiment_objectives].
Starting position
In 1996 the nation ranks 35 on the index against the frozen field, holds 0 of nine domains at Tier 1 and has a tier rank of 20. Its base income is 455 credits a year, calibrated so that its 2026 position is affordable with headroom for investment.
What was decided
A simulation spent a median of 2,431 credits on moves. The five groups that took most were Air Power (buy, 209 credits, 8.6 per cent); Strategic Strike & Missile Defence (buy, 204 credits, 8.4 per cent); Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance (build, 192 credits, 7.9 per cent); Resource Infrastructure (buy, 180 credits, 7.4 per cent); Trade Policy & Market Access (build, 161 credits, 6.6 per cent) [experiment_decisions_by_group]. By mode: partner 45 per cent, build 31 per cent, buy 24 per cent [experiment_decisions_by_group]. Concentration of spending (HHI) had a median of 0.055, and the most repeated action appeared in 37 per cent of rounds.
The leading domain by period: rounds 1 to 5, National Security; rounds 6 to 10, National Security; rounds 11 to 15, Strategic Infrastructure; rounds 16 to 20, Strategic Infrastructure; rounds 21 to 25, Trade & Investment; rounds 26 to 30, Critical Technology [experiment_spend_by_period].
What the world did
A median simulation saw 9 shocks and 1 upside events. The most damaging per firing were S04 (30 firings in 30 simulations, −20.6 points each); S10 (30 firings in 30 simulations, −19.2 points each); S03 (60 firings in 30 simulations, −17.2 points each) [experiment_shocks]. Upside events fired 30 times across all simulations [experiment_shocks].
The groups that lost most to shocks, per simulation: Trade Facilitation & Logistics −2.91; Maritime Power −2.53; Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance −2.50; Investment Attraction & Projection −2.47 [experiment_shock_damage_by_group].
The edges that carried most change through the graph, per simulation: Investment Attraction & Projection to Resource Infrastructure (+0.68 points); Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance to Social Infrastructure (+0.18 points); Fiscal Capacity & Public Finance to Force Generation & Mobilisation (+0.16 points) [experiment_propagation_by_edge].
Where it ended
At 2026 the median rank is 35 (5th to 95th percentile 35 to 35), the median count of Tier 1 domains 1 (0 to 1) and the median tier rank 13; the resilient score, the mean score sum over simulations, is 802 [experiment_objectives].
Tier 1 probability changed most in: strategic infrastructure (0 to 60 per cent of simulations) [experiment_tiers_by_round].
Why
Without shocks the index ends +0.385 higher on average, so the shocks cost about 0.385 index points [experiment_probe_attribution].
Holding instead of following this method changes the index by −1.765: 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 +0.036 and +0.058, for example 2004 buy Air Power (24 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 +0.187 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
tier_jump (warn): largest gain in one domain within five years: 7 tiers (30 simulations above 2); tiers are reported, not an objective.
retired_words (warn): e4-sau/report.md: 'simulations' 1 time(s), first near line 39; use 'simulations'.
The simulation furthest from the median (seed 13) ends +0.02 from it, with 9 shocks and 1 upside events [experiment_outlier_simulations].
Comparison
This is the baseline (hold) experiment, or there is none for this nation in the batch.
Against history: from a reconstructed index of 11.02 the model ends at 11.17, where the 2026 ratings put it at 11.19. Group scores miss by 2.26 points on average, against 1.24 for assuming nothing changed (skill −0.82); the change in each domain has the right sign in 44 per cent of domains. Furthest below history: production and innovation (−1.23); furthest above: trade and investment (+2.90) [experiment_against_history]. The starting position is reconstructed, so part of the error is the reconstruction's.