Kansas
Midwest
State Power #34/51Per-capita #35
State Power
31.3
of 100 · #34
SPI
31.3
SCC
32.7
SDI
35.8
Pillar profile
Talent33.1
Capital20.4
Research31.8
Infrastructure42.6
Agentic35.8
Report · generated from Kansas's indicators
Kansas, standing in full
Kansas is the #33 state by economic size ($200bn GSP) and ranks #34/51 on absolute State Power and #35/51 on per-capita intensity. No pillar stands out as a clear strength; the binding concern is infrastructure.
Economic & scale context
GDP
$200bn
#33 of 51
GDP / capita
$68k
Population
2.9M
AI investment
$1.1bn
#38 of 51
Notable AI orgs
9
Index & pillar read
| Index / pillar | Value | Standing | What a high vs low value means, and where Kansas sits |
|---|---|---|---|
| SPI State Power | 31.3 | Developing · #34/51 | Low here, limited absolute weight, a smaller node leaning on capacity built in larger states. ▲ high: a heavyweight that anchors national AI capacity and pulls in capital and talent · ▼ low: limited absolute weight, a smaller node leaning on capacity built in larger states |
| SCC State Coefficient | 32.7 | Developing · #35/51 | Low here, thin intensity per resident, capability is sparse relative to population. ▲ high: deep capability per resident, a concentrated, high-intensity AI economy · ▼ low: thin intensity per resident, capability is sparse relative to population |
| SDI State Agentic | 35.8 | Moderate · #33/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean agents are widely deployed locally, a near-term productivity multiplier; low would mean agentic deployment is shallow, the local agent lever is under-used. ▲ high: agents are widely deployed locally, a near-term productivity multiplier · ▼ low: agentic deployment is shallow, the local agent lever is under-used |
| Talent Talent | 33.1 | Moderate · #31/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean a deep talent pool, the scarcest input to building AI; low would mean a shallow talent base that constrains how much can be built locally. ▲ high: a deep talent pool, the scarcest input to building AI · ▼ low: a shallow talent base that constrains how much can be built locally |
| Capital Capital | 20.4 | Developing · #36/51 | Low here, thin investment, good ideas struggle to scale locally. ▲ high: abundant capital flowing into building cognitive infrastructure · ▼ low: thin investment, good ideas struggle to scale locally |
| Research Research | 31.8 | Moderate · #32/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean a strong research base feeding a pipeline of ideas and people; low would mean a weak research base, fewer home-grown breakthroughs and spinouts. ▲ high: a strong research base feeding a pipeline of ideas and people · ▼ low: a weak research base, fewer home-grown breakthroughs and spinouts |
| Infrastructure Infrastructure | 42.6 | Developing · #36/51 | Low here, infrastructure gaps cap how much AI can actually be run locally. ▲ high: the physical and digital rails to run AI at scale are in place · ▼ low: infrastructure gaps cap how much AI can actually be run locally |
| Agentic Agentic | 35.8 | Moderate · #33/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean agents are actively deployed, an early-mover productivity edge; low would mean little agentic deployment, the near-term lever is unused. ▲ high: agents are actively deployed, an early-mover productivity edge · ▼ low: little agentic deployment, the near-term lever is unused |
Strengths to build on
- No pillar stands out as a clear strength yet.
Risk factors
- Binding weakness, Infrastructure 42.6 (#36/51, Developing): infrastructure gaps cap how much AI can actually be run locally.
▲
State values are curated v1 estimates on a consistent scale, not yet measured sub-national data.