Probability Cone: 2026-2040
AR(1) mean reversion model with data-driven volatility (Phase 5 recalibration). L(t+1) = 3.56 + 0.956·L(t) + σstage·ε. Equilibrium L* = 80.9. N = 10,000 simulations.
| Scenario | Percentile Range | 2040 Score | Probability | Trigger Conditions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recovery Best 10% of outcomes | p90 – p95 | L = 75 | 10% | Strong institutional recovery; elections produce alternation; mean reversion dominates. Elite defection, economic crisis forcing reform, sustained mass mobilization. |
| Stabilization Gradual mean reversion | p50 – p75 | L = 67 | 25% | Institutions hold; gradual mean reversion toward L*=80.9; modest improvement. Judicial independence maintained, federal system holds. |
| Continued Erosion Slow decline persists | p25 – p50 | L = 63 | 25% | Current trajectory slows but continues; decline at reduced velocity. Partial institutional capture continues; opposition weakened but not eliminated. |
| Accelerated Decline Worst 10% of outcomes | p5 – p10 | L = 52 | 10% | Worst case under data-driven σ; still above L=50 (no tyranny). Constitutional crisis, military politicization, full judicial capture. |
Equilibrium: L* = α / (1 − β) = 80.9. Mean reversion is the dominant dynamic under the FH-calibrated model.
Starting position: L=48 is the PTI (Political Topology Index) assessment. Under Freedom House (L=83), the US starts firmly in the democratic plateau and projections would show correspondingly lower risk.
Data-driven σ: Stage-specific volatility computed from 1,656 Freedom House observations across 91 countries. Values range from 0.45 (Stage 1) to 4.45 (Stage 7). Thesis stipulated σ (3–7) were 2–7× too high and are SUPERSEDED.
Bounds: L clamped to [0, 100]. N = 10,000 paths, random.seed(42).
Source:
phase5-recalibrated-monte-carlo.py (Phase 5 replication package). Volatility Calibration Sensitivity
Monte Carlo projections are highly sensitive to the choice of calibration peer group. The AR(1) model is calibrated on Freedom House data. The following table compares results under four different volatility assumptions, all starting at L=48 (PTI). Under Freedom House scoring (L=83), these projections would be fundamentally different — the US would start near equilibrium.
| Calibration Group | Sigma | Drift | P(L<30 | 5yr) | P(L>55 | 5yr) | Median 5yr | Median 10yr |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OECD Democracies (25 countries) | 3.78 | +0.571 | 0.6% | 12.9% | 50.4 | 53.2 |
| All Democracies (39 countries, recent L>70) | 3.50 | +0.523 | 0.5% | 10.9% | 50.2 | 52.8 |
| Declining Democracies (43 countries, -10pt drop) | 3.05 | +0.131 | 0.4% | 5.2% | 48.3 | 48.9 |
| Turkey/Venezuela/Hungary (3 countries) * | 3.42 | -0.207 | 1.5% | 4.6% | 46.6 | 45.5 |
* Highlighted row indicates the calibration used in the main probability cone above. 1,000 Monte Carlo paths, 10-year horizon.
Interpretation: Volatility (sigma) is comparable across peer groups (OECD: 3.78, Turkey/Ven./Hungary: 3.42). The critical difference is drift: OECD democracies average +0.57 pts/yr (slight upward tendency) vs. -0.21 pts/yr for Turkey/Venezuela/Hungary (negative drift embeds a declining trajectory assumption). Under OECD calibration, P(L<30 within 5 years) = 0.6% and the median 10-year outcome is L=53 (vs. L=45 under thesis calibration). The choice of calibration peer group -- particularly its drift parameter -- is the single largest driver of projection differences. Readers should evaluate which peer group best represents the US trajectory.
phase5-recalibrated-monte-carlo.py. Confidence intervals show p5/p25/p50/p75/p95 percentiles. Model calibrated on Freedom House data; PTI starting point.
Policy Implications & Normative Assessment
The following normative assessments are separated from the empirical analysis above. They reflect the author's interpretation of the data and should be evaluated independently from the statistical findings.
The recalibrated probability cone, using data-driven volatility and a Freedom House-calibrated AR(1) mean reversion model, projects a median trajectory from L=48 (PTI starting point) to L=65 by 2040 — a substantial improvement over the original thesis projection of L=8. The AR(1) model's mean reversion toward L*=80.9 is the dominant force, and even the worst-case (5th percentile) outcome remains above L=52. P(tyranny by 2040) is effectively zero under data-driven parameters. The original thesis claim of 62% is retracted. However, the starting position of L=48 remains contested: published indices place the US at L=65–83 (Freedom House: 83, V-Dem: 65–72). Under Freedom House scoring (L=83), the US begins near the equilibrium and projections would show the country firmly in the democratic plateau with minimal downside risk. The recalibration table in phase5-recalibrated-mc-results.md provides sensitivity analysis across starting values L=48 through L=84.