AI Geopolitical Pace & Safety Simulator

“The Republicans fear slowing down AI development could give China the edge.” — The Verge (@verge)

Explore the high-stakes policy frontier: evaluate how domestic safety certification constraints, advanced semiconductor export controls, and sovereign R&D subsidies balance catastrophic frontier failure risks against international capability parity.

Policy Levers LIVE COMPUTE

Preset Scenarios:

Safety Regulation Strictness 55%

Pre-deployment audits, catastrophic alignment checks, red-teaming mandates.

Export Control Intensity 70%

Advanced HBM & GPU foundry lithography restrictions on external competitors.

Public R&D Subsidy 60%

Federal energy interconnection, supercomputing clusters, national AI lab funding.

International Safety Treaties 30%

Bilateral compute verification treaties and autonomous proliferation bans.

Active Compute & Alignment Dynamics SIMULATING

US FRONTIER LABS CHINA DOMESTIC ECOSYSTEM

36-MONTH VELOCITY TRAJECTORY US: 74.2 vs CN: 71.8

Geopolitical Edge

US Lead (+2.4)

Calculated differential in frontier frontier capabilities

Catastrophic Risk Probability

14.5%

Alignment breakout & uncontrollable deployment risk

US AI Velocity Score

74.2

Algorithmic progress per month adjusted for compliance friction

China AI Velocity Score

71.8

Indigenous compute ramp throttled by Western export limits

Policy Synthesis & Strategic Posture

Economic Growth Index: 88.3 / 100

Strategic Position: US Advantage

Under current parameters, the US maintains an operational technological lead of 2.4 velocity points. High export controls (70%) suppress non-allied frontier hardware replication, while balanced internal safety regulations keep catastrophic failure exposure capped at 14.5%.

Verified JSON Telemetry Handoff

{}

Clicking “Export Telemetry” captures a timestamped policy brief JSON containing exact mathematical weights, velocity vectors, and risk thresholds.