How the Intelligentsia Works

A methodology for identifying thinkers whose ideas are actively shaping institutions and policy — not just being cited, but being acted upon.

The Intelligentsia Criterion

A thinker qualifies as current intelligentsia when their original work can be traced through a documented chain: from the original output → to a specific Layer 1 adoption document (named, dated, with exact citation) → to a Layer 2 propagation outcome (policy language, institutional agenda, or downstream document) — all within a 2024–2026 activity window.

No reputation. No lists. No h-index. Only the evidence chain.

The 3-Layer Influence Chain

Each thinker on this dashboard has their influence mapped through exactly three verifiable steps. Click any step in the dashboard to see the primary source document.

Original Output

The foundational paper, book, or framework the thinker created. Must be a named, dateable artifact — not a general "field of thought."

e.g. Acemoglu, "Power and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle Over Technology and Prosperity" (2023) + 2024 AI harms working papers

Layer 1 Adoption

A specific institutional document (report, hearing, policy note) that explicitly cites or applies the thinker's framework. Must include the document name, issuing body, date, and the exact passage or concept adopted.

e.g. World Bank World Development Report 2026 concept note — cites Acemoglu 2024 on AI enabling repression and propaganda

Layer 2 Propagation

The downstream consequence: another institution acts on Layer 1, or the language enters policy debate, legislation, or executive action. Shows the idea is moving — not just being read.

e.g. IMF Working Papers 2026 + Brookings Papers on Economic Activity adopt institutional governance framing; CFR 2025 report applies innovation/tech governance ideas to US policy

Inclusion Criteria

📄

Named primary source at every step

Every chain link must point to a real document: a report title, hearing transcript, working paper, or executive order. "Broadly influential" language does not qualify.

📅

2024–2026 activity window

The chain must be active recently. Historical influence alone does not qualify — the idea must be moving through institutions right now.

🏛️

Elite-node propagation

Layer 1 and Layer 2 must be elite institutional nodes: G20 bodies, World Bank, IMF, US Congress, national security strategies, central banks, or peer-reviewed policy journals. Media coverage alone does not qualify.

🔗

Explicit attribution

The adoption document must explicitly name the thinker or their specific framework — not just the general topic area. Paraphrasing without citation does not qualify.

What does NOT qualify

High citation counts, h-index, or academic reputation rankings
Appearance on "top intellectuals" lists or magazine profiles
General media presence, op-eds, or podcast appearances
Influence that peaked before 2024 without a current active chain
Theoretical influence without traceable institutional adoption

Glossary

Chain Strength: A composite score (0–100) measuring how many documented Layer 1 and Layer 2 sources are in the chain, how recent they are, and how many distinct institutions adopted the idea. Higher = more verified propagation.
Chain Length: The number of distinct documented layers in the influence chain. Most thinkers on this dashboard have 3 layers (output → adoption → propagation). Some extend to 4+ with congressional testimony or executive action.
Protégé Chain: Former students or direct collaborators who are now in policy or institutional roles, carrying the thinker's framework into new venues. Shown as an optional toggle on the Network Ripple graph.
Activity Window: The year range in which the thinker's chain is active. Chains with no Layer 1 or Layer 2 adoption after 2023 are excluded from the current dashboard.
Layer 1 Adoption: The first institutional document that explicitly cites or applies the thinker's framework. This is the critical bottleneck: many thinkers are discussed but never formally adopted.
Layer 2 Propagation: A second institution that acts on or cites the Layer 1 document — or a measurable policy/regulatory outcome traceable to it. Shows the idea has escaped its original institutional context.