Provisional scores. These version 2.0 scores come from a rescoring pass still in progress: Report v2.0 and Paper v2.0 are not yet written, and some readings are open to challenge (see the Contribute page). Totals may change before release.

Libertarian Minarchism

Comprehensive system: a design or vision for a whole economy, scored as its own sources specify it. Code LM.

9.5 of 29 (33%), 11 structural failures, Structurally Inadequate. Rank 21 (tied) of 23 on equal weights.

Share of each domain's points; the dashed outline is the median of all systems. Compare profiles.

By domain

Material Security

0.5 of 6 = 0.0 + 0.5 + 0.0 + 0.0 + 0.0 + 0.0

C1.1 Poverty Elimination Capacity0.0, structural failure · evidence
C1.2a Wealth Building for Resilience0.5, partial · evidence
C1.2b Prevention of Exploitative Accumulation0.0, structural failure · evidence
C1.3 Housing Security0.0, structural failure · evidence
C1.4 Automation Resilience0.0, structural failure · evidence
C1.5 Universal Wealth Access0.0, structural failure · evidence

Human Autonomy

2.5 of 6 = 0.0 + 0.0 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 1.0 + 0.5

C2.1 Freedom from Coercion0.0, structural failure · evidence
C2.2 Labor Non-Necessity0.0, structural failure · evidence
C2.3 Creative Development Opportunities0.5, partial · evidence
C2.4 Democratic Participation0.5, partial · evidence
C2.5 Exit Rights and Mobility1.0, pass · evidence
C2.6 Civil Liberties and Rule of Law0.5, partial · evidence

System Resilience

2.0 of 6 = 0.0 + 0.5 + 0.0 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5

C3.1 Crisis Response Capacity0.0, structural failure · evidence
C3.2 Inflation Control Mechanisms0.5, partial · evidence
C3.3 Multi-Failure Resistance0.0, structural failure · evidence
C3.4 Epistemic Adaptability0.5, partial · evidence
C3.5 Failure-Mode Transparency0.5, partial · evidence
C3.6 Productive and Innovative Capacity0.5, partial · evidence

Ethical Integrity

2.0 of 6 = 0.5 + 0.0 + 0.0 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5

C4.1 Intergenerational Justice0.5, partial · evidence
C4.2 Ecological Compliance0.0, structural failure · evidence
C4.3 Group Equity0.0, structural failure · evidence
C4.4 Power Distribution0.5, partial · evidence
C4.5 Exploitation Elimination0.5, partial · evidence
C4.6 Harm Internalization0.5, partial · evidence

Implementation Viability

2.5 of 5 = 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5

C5.1 Proven Component Foundation0.5, partial · evidence
C5.2 Staged Transition Pathways0.5, partial · evidence
C5.3 Partial and Parallel Deployability0.5, partial · evidence
C5.4 Political Coalition Potential0.5, partial · evidence
C5.5 Cultural Adaptability0.5, partial · evidence

Close calls

The scoring document registers these scores as calls a reasonable scorer could set differently.

Criterion	Scored	Alternative	Direction
`C1.2a`	0.5	0.0	stated
`C2.5`	1.0	0.5	stated
`C2.6`	0.5	1.0	stated
`C3.4`	0.5	0.0	stated
`C3.5`	0.5	0.0	stated
`C4.1`	0.5	0.0	stated
`C4.2`	0.0	0.5	stated
`C4.5`	0.5	0.0	stated

Resolved together, they give:

Reading	Total	Failures	Tier
As scored	9.5	11	Structurally Inadequate
Every flagged call resolved upward	10.5	10	Structurally Inadequate
Every flagged call resolved downward	6.5	16	Structurally Inadequate

Evidence

NEEC v1 scores re-estimated on the v2.0 criteria by the rescoring pass (NEEC_Rescoring_s37.md to NEEC_Rescoring_s65.md), the three new criteria scored in Session 65, re-read blind in Sessions 71 to 77 (NEEC_BlindReview_s71.md to NEEC_BlindReview_s77.md), with the owner's decisions 79.1 to 79.4 (NEEC_OwnerDecisions_s79.md), applied by apply_owner_s79.py; provisional until the outside review and Report and Paper v2.0.

The evidence report for this system has one section for each criterion: the score, the reading of each clause with its source, the close call if there is one, and links to the exact line of the published rationale and of the rescoring record that read it.

The full text is in the scoring documents:

Check this system with an AI Challenge a score Add evidence