Minnesota
Midwest
State Power #18/51Per-capita #18
State Power
51.8
of 100 · #18
SPI
51.8
SCC
57.1
SDI
57.6
Pillar profile
Talent51.5
Capital45.4
Research58.3
Infrastructure72.5
Agentic57.6
Nearest peers (per-capita)
- Georgia57.9
- North Carolina58.1
- Connecticut58.5
- Oregon59.1
- Florida54.8
Report · generated from Minnesota's indicators
Minnesota, standing in full
Minnesota is the #20 state by economic size ($460bn GSP) and ranks #18/51 on absolute State Power and #18/51 on per-capita intensity. Its strongest pillar is Research (58.3, Strong); no single pillar is a binding weakness.
Economic & scale context
GDP
$460bn
#20 of 51
GDP / capita
$80k
Population
5.7M
AI investment
$6.2bn
#19 of 51
Notable AI orgs
26
Index & pillar read
| Index / pillar | Value | Standing | What a high vs low value means, and where Minnesota sits |
|---|---|---|---|
| SPI State Power | 51.8 | Moderate · #18/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean a heavyweight that anchors national AI capacity and pulls in capital and talent; low would mean 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 | 57.1 | Moderate · #18/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean deep capability per resident, a concentrated, high-intensity AI economy; low would mean 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 | 57.6 | Moderate · #19/51 | 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 | 51.5 | Moderate · #17/51 | 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 | 45.4 | Moderate · #17/51 | Mid-pack. High would mean abundant capital flowing into building cognitive infrastructure; low would mean 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 | 58.3 | Strong · #13/51 | High here, a strong research base feeding a pipeline of ideas and people. ▲ 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 | 72.5 | Strong · #15/51 | High here, the physical and digital rails to run AI at scale are in place. ▲ 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 | 57.6 | Moderate · #19/51 | 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
- Research (58.3, Strong), a strong research base feeding a pipeline of ideas and people.
- Infrastructure (72.5, Strong), the physical and digital rails to run AI at scale are in place.
Risk factors
- No acute structural gaps stand out across the state pillars.
▲
State values are curated v1 estimates on a consistent scale, not yet measured sub-national data.