The three methods
1 · Entropy-weighted TOPSIS (data-driven weights). Shannon entropy gives each criterion a weight by how much it varies across the 32 materials, then TOPSIS ranks each by closeness to the worst case (Hwang & Yoon 1981; Achzet & Helbig 2013). The weights it produces: origin gap 0.41China share 0.37trade HHI 0.10mine HHI 0.06refining conc. 0.03hard to substitute 0.02governance risk 0.01no recycling 0.00. The ranking diverges moderately from my fixed-weight index (Spearman ρ 0.7) — the data load most weight on China-share and origin-gap, pushing tungsten, magnesium and magnets up.
2 · GeoPolRisk (Gemechu et al. 2016) — stage concentration × the governance risk of the producers, for the mine and trade stages.
3 · Monte-Carlo supply-at-risk — each producer fails with a governance-derived probability and a random severity; over 20,000 draws I report the mean loss (ESaR) and the 95% tail (VaR/CVaR) — the shock scenarios made probabilistic.
Caveat: entropy rewards dispersion, not importance, so it nearly zeroes near-uniform criteria like recycling — read TOPSIS as a data-driven complement to the fixed index, not a verdict. All on public data, deterministic (fixed seed); disruption probabilities are governance-derived assumptions, not forecasts.
Computed by build_riskmethods.py from data.json + flows_2024.json + wgi.json → riskmethods.json. Tail risk highest: Gallium, Germanium, Natural graphite, Silicon, < 99.99%. A screening panel — the Monte-Carlo probabilities are transparent governance-based assumptions, not predictions.