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
Estonia played 20 rounds from 2026 under the greedy marginal method, with stochastic events, 100 times. Its capability index moved from 11.49 to a median of 12.95 (+1.47), with 90 per cent of simulations between 11.46 and 13.88 [experiment_objectives].
Starting position
In 2026 the nation ranks 33 on the index against the frozen field, holds 0 of nine domains at Tier 1 and has a tier rank of 27. Its base income is 347 credits a year, calibrated so that its 2026 position is affordable with headroom for investment.
What was decided
A simulation spent a median of 1,883 credits on moves. The five groups that took most were Semiconductors & Advanced Computing (buy, 168 credits, 9.0 per cent); Space Technologies (partner, 143 credits, 7.7 per cent); Economic Output & Productivity (buy, 128 credits, 6.9 per cent); Energy Technologies (buy, 92 credits, 4.9 per cent); Development Cooperation & Global Assistance (buy, 88 credits, 4.7 per cent) [experiment_decisions_by_group]. By mode: buy 58 per cent, partner 33 per cent, build 9 per cent [experiment_decisions_by_group]. Concentration of spending (HHI) had a median of 0.043, and the most repeated action appeared in 45 per cent of rounds.
The leading domain by period: rounds 1 to 5, Critical Technology; rounds 6 to 10, Critical Technology; rounds 11 to 15, Critical Technology; rounds 16 to 20, Critical Technology [experiment_spend_by_period].
The method's chosen action was within 5 per cent of its best alternative in 96 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 2 shocks and 1 upside events. The most damaging per firing were S03 (33 firings in 31 simulations, −39.7 points each); S10 (3 firings in 3 simulations, −38.7 points each); S09 (9 firings in 9 simulations, −38.4 points each) [experiment_shocks]. Upside events fired 88 times across all simulations [experiment_shocks].
The groups that lost most to shocks, per simulation: Information Environment & Strategic Communication −1.70; Energy Infrastructure −1.61; Maritime Power −1.59; Economic Leverage & Dependence −1.51 [experiment_shock_damage_by_group].
The edges that carried most change through the graph, per simulation: Semiconductors & Advanced Computing to Artificial Intelligence (+3.61 points); Space Technologies to Space Operations (+1.68 points); Semiconductors & Advanced Computing to Economic Leverage & Dependence (+1.45 points) [experiment_propagation_by_edge].
Where it ended
At 2046 the median rank is 22 (5th to 95th percentile 19 to 34), the median count of Tier 1 domains 1 (0 to 2) and the median tier rank 16; the resilient score, the mean score sum over simulations, is 917 [experiment_objectives].
Tier 1 probability changed most in: human capital (0 to 89 per cent of simulations) [experiment_tiers_by_round].
Why
Without shocks the index ends +1.326 higher on average, so the shocks cost about 1.326 index points [experiment_probe_attribution].
Holding instead of following this method changes the index by −2.349: 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 −0.025 and −0.019, for example 2039 partner Trade Facilitation & Logistics (20 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 +0.593 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: 5 tiers (76 simulations above 2).
retired_words (warn): e3-est-greedy-marginal/report.md: 'simulations' 1 time(s), first near line 40; use 'simulations'.
The simulation furthest from the median (seed 33) ends −2.94 from it, with 8 shocks and 0 upside events [experiment_outlier_simulations].
Comparison
Against the hold experiment for the same nation (e3-est-hold), the median index is +2.36 points apart, the median rank 22 against 42, and Tier 1 domains 1 against 0 [experiment_against_hold].
No backcast comparison: this experiment does not start from a historical position [experiment_against_history].