Compound Fork — Compute scale × Mars uncrewed

Each cell = a joint scenario "Both branches fire". Cell intensity = total |Δ| across the 200 highest-conviction tradeable predictions vs their unconditional posterior. Joint probabilities approximated via log-odds combination (assumes conditional independence given the prediction — coarse but bounded). Click a cell to drill into the dominant single-fork view.

Pick two fork families

Rows (Compute scale)Compute scaleEnergy / gridHumanoid deploymentRobotaxiAGIASI$1T+ IPOMars uncrewedAI pauseRecession
Cols (Mars uncrewed)Compute scaleEnergy / gridHumanoid deploymentRobotaxiAGIASI$1T+ IPOMars uncrewedAI pauseRecession
Compute scale ↓ × Mars uncrewed
MARS_2026
prior 25%
MARS_2028
prior 50%
MARS_2031PLUS
prior 25%
COMPUTE_1GW_2027
prior 60%
120 claims · Σ|Δ| 14.89
121 claims · Σ|Δ| 14.97
121 claims · Σ|Δ| 14.97
COMPUTE_10GW_2028
prior 40%
126 claims · Σ|Δ| 15.90
126 claims · Σ|Δ| 15.90
126 claims · Σ|Δ| 15.90
COMPUTE_100GW_2030
prior 20%
124 claims · Σ|Δ| 16.43
124 claims · Σ|Δ| 16.43
124 claims · Σ|Δ| 16.43
COMPUTE_STARGATE_FAILURE
prior 15%
120 claims · Σ|Δ| 14.84
121 claims · Σ|Δ| 14.92
121 claims · Σ|Δ| 14.92

Method note

Joint conditional probability is approximated via log-odds combination: logit(P(pred|A,B)) ≈ logit(P(pred|A)) + logit(P(pred|B)) − logit(P(pred)). This is the closed-form Bayesian update assuming A and B are conditionally independent given the prediction. It's correct when the two scenarios act on the prediction through different causal paths; it's pessimistic when they overlap. The exact joint requires running the Gibbs sampler with both scenarios clamped, which would be N×M=16 sampling runs (~12 minutes per refresh) instead of N+M=8 — a 2× cost for higher fidelity.