Kansas
Midwest
State Power #33/51Per-capita #34
State Power
31.1
of 100 · #33
SPI
31.1
SCC
32.0
SDI
35.8
Pillar profile
Talent33.7
Capital20.8
Research31.8
Infrastructure37.7
Agentic35.8
Nearest peers (per-capita)
- Idaho33.0
- New Mexico31.0
- Vermont30.8
- Iowa33.6
- Nebraska34.9
Report · generated from Kansas's indicators
Kansas — standing in full
Kansas is the #33 state by economic size ($200bn GSP) and ranks #33/51 on absolute State Power and #34/51 on per-capita intensity. No pillar stands out as a clear strength; the binding concern is capital.
Economic & scale context
GDP
$200bn
#33 of 51
GDP / capita
$68k
Population
2.9M
AI investment
$1.1bn
#36 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 | 31.1 | Moderate · #33/51 | 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 | 32.0 | Developing · #34/51 | 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 | 33.7 | Moderate · #30/51 | 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 | 20.8 | 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 | 37.7 | Developing · #35/51 | 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 — Capital 20.8 (#36/51, Developing): thin investment — good ideas struggle to scale locally.
▲
State values are curated v1 estimates on a consistent scale — not yet measured sub-national data.