🧬 Future Leadership Selection Simulation System
Purpose: To move beyond selecting leaders through "votes" or "rhetoric" and instead choose individuals with true governance potential based on "systemic capabilities" and "evolutionary adaptability."
🔹 Stage One: Multidimensional Cognition & Systems Understanding Test
Candidates must demonstrate real-world performance in the following simulated environments:
| Simulation Task | Evaluation Criteria |
|---|---|
| Cross-System Decision Simulation (Economy × Environment × Society) | Model integration ability, long-term risk awareness |
| Real-Time Decision-Making Under Information Overload | Cognitive stability, emotional resilience, info filtering |
| Ethical Dilemma Tasks (e.g., AI control, resource allocation) | Multi-scale value balancing, ability to identify irreversible consequences |
| Public Crisis Drill (e.g., pandemic, extreme climate) | Instruction design under time pressure, capacity for responsibility |
🔹 Stage Two: Collective Adaptability Contribution Score
Evaluation is not only based on personal traits, but also on whether the individual strengthens the overall health of the system:
- Do they propose governance models that others can adopt, replicate, and improve?
- Do they enhance the capabilities of other participants? (similar to open-source contribution metrics)
- Do they exhibit "design thinking" that enables more autonomous system operation?
→ Related Technologies: Collective intelligence simulation, Multi-Agent Evaluation System
🔹 Stage Three: Anonymous Governance Simulation + Results Tracking
Candidates govern anonymously in a simulation environment (without identity exposure), evaluated purely by outcomes and data performance:
- Policy implementation forecast error (model reliability)
- Feedback adjustment frequency (correction capacity)
- Change in societal stability index (quality of impact)
- Public participation rate & transparency of information (system trust level)
🔹 Final Selection Logic: Systemic Credibility Index (SCI)
After all simulation phases, candidates are scored across the following dimensions:
| Dimension | Weight (%) |
|---|---|
| Cognitive Stability + Analytical Depth | 25% |
| Long-Term Simulation Performance (Policy Forecast Accuracy) | 25% |
| System Contribution Value (Enhancing Evolutionary Capacity) | 30% |
| Decision Transparency + Self-Correction Ability | 20% |
The highest-scoring individuals are not "elected" by popular vote, but proposed by the system for participatory simulation verification and audit by the collective.
🔚 Conclusion:
The essence of this system is to turn "leadership selection" into an evolutionary testing ground—allowing those who can truly drive humanity forward in complex and dynamic environments to emerge through performance, not rhetoric.
This is not just about choosing people—
It’s about choosing the direction of humanity’s systemic evolution.
