What this map does not know yet

Research sites tend to show their finished edges. This one is three weeks old and mostly unfinished, so here is the inventory of what it does not know, kept in one place and meant to shrink.

Some maker rows are still unverified

Most of the rows listing who makes something under coverage now carry a source a person has opened and read. The rest do not, and the front page prints the fraction rather than rounding it up. Every row shows whether it is sourced.

The unverified ones are not guesses in the sense of being invented. They come from trade knowledge and are very likely correct. They are simply not findings, and the difference matters enough to render it on every row.

The directory grades are judgements

Separately from the maker rows, about a hundred organisations are graded by how hard they would be to replace. Each row cites a source for who the organisation is and what it does; the grade itself has no citation and is an informed judgement. If you work in one of these chains, that page is the easiest place to make this map better in five minutes.

Readiness scores are single judgements

Every entry in the science section carries a readiness number from one to nine with a sentence explaining it. Each now cites a source, but the number is still one judgement, not yet checked by anyone who works in the field.

Policy coverage is twelve rules across three jurisdictions

Twelve instruments were fetched and read from government sources. That is enough to show the shape and nowhere near enough to be a reference. Several jurisdictions in the table show no number at all, which means nothing has been researched for them, not that they have no rules.

There is also exactly one instrument where a named organisation is recorded as having asked for it, because that is the only one where an organisation said so in its own published document. The other eleven say so plainly.

The track record is empty rather than absent

The first seven dated calls were published on 15 September 2026, each naming the observation that would settle it and the date by which reality has to answer. None of them comes due before 2027, so there is nothing to score yet.

That is a real limitation and not a modest one: a research project is eventually worth what its past calls were worth, and this one cannot yet point at a single resolved prediction. What it can point at is that the calls are public, dated, and written to be losable — including one that predicts this map will turn out to be uninteresting about silicon carbide.

Why publish this list

Two reasons. A gap that is written down is a gap somebody can close, and several of these could be closed by one person who happens to know one chain. And a site that shows only its finished edges is asking to be trusted for the wrong reasons.