---
entity_slug: economic_system_benchmark
evaluator: null
evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T05:13:07.382052'
overall_score: 2.6
scores:
- name: definition_precision
  value: 2.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The definition is quite vague and circular, essentially defining benchmarks
    as "reference points and measures used to evaluate" without specifying what constitutes
    these benchmarks or how they function. It reads more like a generic description
    of evaluation criteria than a precise economic concept.
- name: source_grounding
  value: 2.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: While Smith does compare different economic systems in Book IV, the text
    does not explicitly discuss "benchmarks" as a distinct analytical framework or
    methodology. This appears to impose modern evaluation terminology onto Smith's
    comparative analysis rather than extracting a concept he actually articulated.
- name: domain_placement
  value: 3.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: '"General Theory" is appropriate given the broad evaluative nature described,
    though the entity is so abstract it could arguably fit in multiple domains. The
    placement isn''t wrong but reflects the entity''s lack of specificity.'
- name: vsm_relevance
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity maps well to S3 (internal regulation/audit) and S4 (intelligence/environmental
    adaptation) functions, as benchmarking involves both performance monitoring and
    comparative intelligence gathering. The evaluative and comparative aspects align
    naturally with VSM control and adaptation mechanisms.
- name: explanatory_value
  value: 2.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The entity provides minimal explanatory power, functioning more as a
    meta-label for evaluation processes rather than illuminating specific mechanisms
    or structural relations in Smith's economic theory. It names a general phenomenon
    without revealing how economic comparison actually works in Smith's framework.
---

# Evaluation: Economic System Benchmark

## definition_precision — 2.0 / 5.0

The definition is quite vague and circular, essentially defining benchmarks as "reference points and measures used to evaluate" without specifying what constitutes these benchmarks or how they function. It reads more like a generic description of evaluation criteria than a precise economic concept.

## source_grounding — 2.0 / 5.0

While Smith does compare different economic systems in Book IV, the text does not explicitly discuss "benchmarks" as a distinct analytical framework or methodology. This appears to impose modern evaluation terminology onto Smith's comparative analysis rather than extracting a concept he actually articulated.

## domain_placement — 3.0 / 5.0

"General Theory" is appropriate given the broad evaluative nature described, though the entity is so abstract it could arguably fit in multiple domains. The placement isn't wrong but reflects the entity's lack of specificity.

## vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0

This entity maps well to S3 (internal regulation/audit) and S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation) functions, as benchmarking involves both performance monitoring and comparative intelligence gathering. The evaluative and comparative aspects align naturally with VSM control and adaptation mechanisms.

## explanatory_value — 2.0 / 5.0

The entity provides minimal explanatory power, functioning more as a meta-label for evaluation processes rather than illuminating specific mechanisms or structural relations in Smith's economic theory. It names a general phenomenon without revealing how economic comparison actually works in Smith's framework.
