Study the fracture. Don’t invent a formula.
The scenario library converts a supplied research dossier into a comparative framework for political transitions, institutional resilience, and high-severity tails. It is descriptive analysis—not advocacy, prediction, or a playbook.
1. Start with the institution
Ask what authority, process, budget, command system, court, election mechanism, or administrative function is actually under stress.
2. Separate pressure from fracture
Large demonstrations, a shutdown, a contested claim, or even scattered order refusals can be severe without creating a new sovereign order.
3. Look for coupling
The extreme outcomes in the source set usually require several failures to coincide: command, fiscal execution, legal finality, security alignment, administration, and public legitimacy.
4. Preserve off-ramps
Courts, elections, succession, negotiations, verified information, ordinary legislation, and professional administrative processes are modeled as pathways back from acute crisis.
5. Treat numbers as stress tests
Where source papers use participation, casualty, displacement, or duration ranges, those are scenario envelopes—not thresholds, forecasts, or success criteria.
6. Keep the site non-operational
The library can examine violence and institutional breakdown at a systems level but does not provide instructions for weapons, sabotage, targeting, evasion, covert access, or political recruitment.
Source set
The v0.41.0 library consolidates the supplied research corpus into eleven canonical pages. Duplicates and companion papers are grouped under the same scenario instead of being published as competing versions.
Current-law and institutional claims should be periodically revalidated because statutes, cases, regulations, and institutional arrangements can change. The scenario pages are snapshots of the supplied research set, not live legal advice.