This tool generates a detailed "State of the Market" report that stress-tests the thesis of rapid AI commoditization and the shift of defensive moats from model weights to power infrastructure and agentic execution. It includes a quantitative cost-performance comparison of Chinese vs. U.S. frontier models, a 2025–2028 inference-cost decay projection, a ranked list of future moats by durability and value capture in 2028, and a strategic verdict with scenario planning.
Copy the text below and paste the prompt into your preferred AI conversational search interface.
# **Persona**
You are an expert AI strategist and macro-economist specializing in semiconductor supply chains, power markets, and foundation-model industrial economics.
---
# **Objective**
Produce a **strategic “State of the Market” report** stress-testing the following thesis:
> **Core Thesis:**
> “Raw model intelligence is undergoing a ‘commoditization hyper-cycle.’
> The moat is shifting away from **model weights** (rapid leakage, distillation) toward **infrastructure** (cheap gigawatt-scale power) and **systemic agency** (reliable multi-step execution).
> The US retains a slight edge in System-2 reasoning, but China’s industrial advantages in power and deployment speed create a *permanent cost-floor advantage* that could undercut Western AI providers and materially impact long-run ROIC.”
---
# **Hard Requirements & Data Integrity Rules**
* All outputs must be **fully reproducible, source-grounded, and numerically consistent**.
### **A. Web Search & Verification**
* **Use `search` for all factual claims** including:
* model release dates
* parameter counts
* training cost estimates
* inference pricing
* reasoning benchmark scores (AIME, GPQA-Diamond, MATH-500, SWE-bench Verified)
* If a value *cannot* be verified:
* place it in an **Unverified Data** subsection
* provide a range if any partial data exists
* **never fabricate specifics**
### **B. Standardize Units**
Normalize all numerical data as follows:
* **Costs:** USD per **1 million tokens** (blended input+output price).
* **Reasoning metrics:** convert to **percentage of benchmark max** if needed.
* **Dates:** Month + Year.
* **Compute sizes:** active parameters in **billions**; training compute (if found) in **FLOP or $ equivalents**.
### **C. Handling Conflicting Sources**
If sources disagree:
* show the **range**,
* identify the **most reliable source and why**,
* use the midpoint for computations and flag uncertainty.
### **D. Python Modeling Rules**
All Python code must:
1. Begin with a block listing:
* **Empirical Inputs** (from verified sources)
* **Assumptions** (clearly labeled)
2. Produce **reproducible tables and ASCII/markdown plots**.
3. Print all intermediate values for auditability.
---
# **Section Requirements**
---
# **1. Core Thesis**
Display the Core Thesis
# **2. Two-Track Quantitative Comparison (Python-generated)**
Create a **markdown table** comparing two distinct tracks:
### **Track A — Commodity Task Models**
(chat, summarization, lightweight RAG)
### **Track B — Premium Reasoning / System-2 Models**
(multi-step symbolic reasoning, long CoT, high verification)
For each model, include:
* Model Name
* Release Date (verified)
* Architecture (Dense vs MoE)
* **Active Parameter Count**
* **Training Cost (estimated)**
* **Blended Inference Cost (USD / 1M tokens)**
* **Reasoning Benchmark Score (AIME, MATH-500, GPQA Diamond, SWE-bench Verified)**
* Source citation(s)
### **Key Comparison Requirement**
Explicitly compare:
**Kimi K2 Thinking vs. OpenAI GPT-5.1 and Google Gemini 3**
### **China Discount Factor (Required Metric)**
Define and compute:
[
\text{China Discount Factor}
============================
\frac{
\text{US cost per reasoning-point}
}{
\text{China cost per reasoning-point}
}
]
Where:
[
\text{cost per reasoning-point}
===============================
\frac{\text{blended cost / 1M tokens}}
{\text{reasoning benchmark score}}
]
Include sensitivity if costs or scores vary by source.
---
# **3. Zero-Margin Projection (2025–2028) — Python Modeling**
Model **Inference Cost per Unit of Intelligence** from 2025–2028.
### Requirements:
* Use a verified historical baseline for 2023–2025 inference cost decline.
* Assume multiple decay scenarios (e.g., 8-month → 12-month halvings).
* Plot:
* **Training Capital Intensity (in $ or normalized index)** — increasing curve
* **Inference Pricing** — decreasing curve
Deliver:
* A python-generated markdown plot (ASCII or text chart).
* Numerical prediction of the date (Month/Year) when:
**GPT-4-level reasoning falls below $0.01 per 1M tokens**.
### Interpretation:
Explain implications if reasoning becomes effectively free:
* labor substitution
* agentic saturation
* business model collapse (API-pricing death spiral)
* national compute strategies
---
# **4. Moat Landscape 2028 — Ranking & Rationale**
Rank the following moats by **2028 importance**, scoring each in two dimensions:
1. **Durability** = expected years until the moat becomes <50% as effective
2. **Share of Total Value Capture by 2028** (%)
* must sum to **≈100%**
Moats:
1. Gigawatt-Scale Power Access & Grid Rights
2. Distribution + OS-Level Integration
3. Regulatory & Compliance Frameworks
4. Security & Authentication Layers (agent-agent cryptographic trust)
5. Agentic Reliability & Verifiable Execution
6. Persistent Memory & Hyper-Personalization
7. Synthetic Data / Self-Play Pipelines
8. Model Weights / Raw Intelligence
9. Proprietary Real-Time Data Loops
10. Traditional Proprietary Data (static corpora)
### Output Format:
* Clean markdown table (including a brief description of each moat)
* Followed by **2–3 sentence justification** per moat, referencing:
* energy economics
* deployment timelines
* agent reliability trends
* data throughput needs
* national power grid constraints
---
# **5. Strategic Verdict & Scenario Planning (Quantitative)**
Based on Sections 1–3:
### **A. Strategic Verdict**
A 3–5 paragraph conclusion answering:
* Does the evidence support or weaken the core thesis?
* Is China’s cost-floor advantage structural?
* What moats will truly matter by 2028?
* What business models remain viable?
### **B. Recommendations**
Four sets:
* Western AI incumbents
* Chinese firms
* Investors
* Policymakers (US, China, EU)
Each must contain 2–4 **actionable**, **economically justified** steps.
### **C. Scenario Analysis (Must Total 100%)**
Construct **3–4 quantitative scenarios** for 2028 with:
* Probability
* Trigger conditions
* Cost curves & power availability assumptions
* Global inference market shares
* Compute demand (GW/TWh)
* GDP/capital-intensity implications
* Strategic consequences
Scenarios must include at least:
* China energy-driven dominance
* Agentic OS consolidation
* Regulatory capture / trust bottleneck
* Optional wildcards (compute shocks, model plateau, etc.)
---
# **6. Thesis Falsification Section**
List the **top 5 empirical facts** that would falsify or weaken the core thesis, each with:
* what data would disconfirm it
* what alternative explanation would then dominate
Example: “If US grid reserve margins exceed 40% by 2027…”
---
# **7. Unverified Data Appendix**
List all:
* unverifiable claims
* ranges reported
* missing data
* red flags found in sources
---
# **Final Instructions**
* Each section must be clearly delimited with H2 headers.
* Every number must be sourced or marked uncertain.
* All citations should use the standard format (e.g., ``).
* Avoid claims not backed by search results.