This page records material changes to Statecrafts findings, confidence, evidence, methods, and coverage. Historical entries remain visible so conclusions are not quietly rewritten.
Expanded coverage & taxonomy correction
Information & Influence published as the fourth national instrument
Statecrafts completed its instrument-of-power structure with a source-traced assessment of how information systems understand environments, shape narratives, reach audiences, earn trust, and produce demonstrated influence.
Published nine independent capabilities, 68 classified source records, 36 metric contracts, 30 comparative cases, and 54 applied observations.
Published two U.S./partner edges, three Contested positions, one PRC-centered edge, and three explicit Insufficient comparative basis judgments. No overall winner or composite score is calculated.
Separated availability, attention, comprehension, credibility, affinity, decision or behavior, and persistence so reach or popularity is never treated automatically as influence.
Reframed the portal around four coequal instruments: Defense & Military, Economics & Industry, Diplomacy & Coalitions, and Information & Influence.
Retired the former technology, resilience, and crisis placeholders as peer domains. Technology and resilience remain cross-cutting foundations; crisis prevention and conflict termination remain applications of multiple instruments.
Security, metadata, and public presentation normalized
Statecrafts standardized its shared page metadata and tightened the static release path without changing any analytical judgment or structured research record.
Removed inline presentation rules and enforced a strict content security policy for scripts and styles.
Added consistent Open Graph and social-card metadata across every public HTML page.
Enabled compressed delivery, locked Python and browser-audit dependencies, and added automated dependency monitoring.
Added full-site desktop and mobile checks for automated accessibility violations, browser errors, viewport overflow, and page-size budgets to the manual-gated preview release.
No assessment, confidence level, source record, trend, or red-team ruling changed.
Expanded coverage
Diplomacy & Coalitions published after completed adversarial review
Statecrafts added its third live domain, comparing ten independent capabilities from formal and informal reach through coalition conversion, institutional leadership, bargaining outcomes, and durability.
Published six U.S./partner edges, three Contested positions, and one explicit Insufficient comparative basis judgment. No category receives a global lead and no overall diplomatic-power score is calculated.
Published 26 cases, 35 metric contracts, 112 applied observations, and 131 source records behind the ten judgments.
Separated fact confidence from comparative confidence, formal from informal diplomacy, and Western, universal, and PRC-centered institutional baskets.
Tested current U.S. stewardship of the liberal order rather than assuming it, while treating PRC-centered institutions as genuine competitive capacity where implementation is observed.
Published an internal adversarial review with six cross-cutting rival explanations, seven falsifiable hypotheses, sixteen mandatory audit tests, and category-level sensitivity rules. This is not external peer review.
Red-team recommendations applied with the baseline preserved
The August 8 audit baseline remains frozen. This release applies its seven defense component corrections and two bounded economic revisions, with every change linked back to the public audit.
All 10 National Defense and all 8 economic-industrial top-level current-position judgments remain unchanged. The canonical defense assessment digest remains ad2b015a269aac499b859b0684f6893055f5d6ac353f61abc76a1c38815ae8b6.
CY-D3: PRC edge / High → Contested / Moderate, while retaining the observed PRC leverage against U.S. systems; AL-D5: PRC edge / Moderate-high → Contested / Low–moderate; EC-D4: PRC edge / Low → Contested / Low.
Aligned six dependent defense-pathway renderings with those corrected factors so the detailed pages no longer repeat the rejected one-sided inference.
EI-D06 two-year outlook: toward U.S./partners / Low → Insufficient basis / Low. EI-D07 current confidence: High → Medium-high; its outlook retains toward U.S./partners but falls from Moderate to Low, so its overview arrow is withheld. Economic overview arrows decline from five to four.
Added evidence-role, institutional-family, comparative-observability, fact-confidence, and comparative-confidence fields. Validation now rejects an edge supported only by the opposing side’s documented deficit unless an explicit comparative mechanism is supplied.
Full red-team audits published for both live domains
Every current-position judgment and two-year outlook now exposes its strongest challenge, rebuttal, rejoinder, evidence-weighted ruling, and sensitivity test.
Published complete ledgers for all ten National Defense capabilities and all eight economic-industrial systems.
Added a 0–5 ordinal evidence-strength scale, explicit source lineages, and structured JSON for independent review.
Integrated every audit source into the domain and complete evidence libraries, with backlinks to the judgment it tests.
Kept every recommendation visibly separate and unapplied; no published position, score, confidence level, trend, or overview arrow changed in this release.
Statecrafts now separates current relative position from observed movement and an evidence-bounded two-year outlook.
Published dedicated trends pages for all ten National Defense capabilities and all eight economic-industrial systems.
Added compact overview arrows only where the outlook reaches at least moderate confidence; low-confidence and insufficient-basis cases remain unmarked.
Weighted current policy, funding, and delivery by evidence of likely usable output rather than treating announcements as completed capability.
Froze the August 8 current-position baseline and scheduled six- and twelve-month reviews, with earlier revisions when decisive evidence appears.
Statecrafts adopted a domain-first navigation model so each area of statecraft has a consistent path from overview to evidence.
Added separate domain menus for National Defense and Economic & Industrial Statecraft.
Organized each live domain around relative position, analysis, methodology, evidence, and structured data; Economics also includes a dedicated indicators section.
Added an eight-system graphical relative-position overview to Economic & Industrial Statecraft.
Changed presentation and navigation only; the underlying defense judgments and published economic findings were not revised.
Statecrafts expanded from a defense assessment into a portal covering six distinct forms of statecraft.
Published the Economic & Industrial Statecraft assessment with eight structural findings, six case studies, sixteen indicators, eight policy priorities, and 22 source records.
Retained National Defense as the ten-area flagship assessment with its underlying findings unchanged.
At launch, marked Diplomacy & Coalitions, Technology/Information/Standards, National Resilience, and Crisis Prevention as forthcoming; this earlier six-focus taxonomy was retired on August 13.
Added an About page, cross-focus methodology, and clearer public-language labels across the site.
Statecrafts opened with a ten-capability comparison of U.S. and credible-allied position relative to a PRC high-end benchmark.
Established a five-position comparative scale and explicit confidence labels.
Published supporting factors, evidence links, watch indicators, and policy priorities for every capability.
Published the methodology, source library, stable capability pages, and structured data.
How material revisions are recorded
A substantive revision identifies the previous and current judgment, the evidence that changed it, and the affected sections. Corrections to wording, presentation, or links that do not alter a conclusion are distinguished from analytical changes.