Posts List Oldapi View
We shared this request example with FAB participants: url_qparams = { "limit": count, "offset": offset, "has_group": "false", "order_by": "-activity", "forecast_type": "binary", "project": tournament_id, "status": "open", "type": "forecast", "include_description": "true", } url = f"{api_info.base_url}/questions/" response = requests.get( url, headers={"Authorization": f"Token {api_info.token}"}, params=url_qparams )
But we don't want to support all these parameters, and the ones relevant are: - order_by - status - project - forecast_type - we ignore this, but assume it's binary - FAB only supports binary for now.
GET /api2/questions/?format=api&offset=40
{ "count": 6412, "next": "http://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/?format=api&limit=20&offset=60", "previous": "http://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/?format=api&limit=20&offset=20", "results": [ { "id": 40667, "title": "Will an official international supervisory board explicitly tasked with overseeing transitional governance of the Gaza Strip be constituted, with at least two publicly named individual members, between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC)?", "short_title": "Will an official international supervisory board explicitly tasked with overseeing transitional gove", "url_title": "Will an official international supervisory board explicitly tasked with overseeing transitional gove", "slug": "will-an-official-international-supervisory-board-explicitly-tasked-with-overseeing-transitional-gove", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:19.077560Z", "published_at": "2025-11-18T23:13:09Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-19T00:44:00.504296Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:19.307915Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-19T00:43:09Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-19T00:43:09Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-18T23:13:09Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40263, "title": "Will an official international supervisory board explicitly tasked with overseeing transitional governance of the Gaza Strip be constituted, with at least two publicly named individual members, between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC)?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:19.077991Z", "open_time": "2025-11-18T23:13:09Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-19T00:43:09Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-19T00:43:09Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-19T00:43:09Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-19T00:43:09Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-10-01:\n- On 2025-09-29, the White House published a 20-point plan proposing that Gaza be governed temporarily by a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee under the oversight and supervision of a new international transitional body referred to as a “Board of Peace,” to be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump, with other members to be announced, including former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. The board would set the framework and handle funding for redevelopment until a reformed Palestinian Authority could take over. Reuters reporting on 2025-09-29 similarly described the “Board of Peace” as a proposed international overseer board led by Trump, with Tony Blair mentioned for an undefined role; Gaza’s day-to-day services would be run by a technocratic committee overseen by this board. These descriptions indicate a proposal rather than an already-established body as of the reporting dates.\n- Geography/definition: The Gaza Strip (Gaza) is a Palestinian territory in the Southern Levant, bordered by Egypt (SW) and Israel (E and N), about 41 km long and 6–12 km wide, area ~365 km². It includes Gaza City and other towns such as Khan Yunis and Rafah. It has a Mediterranean coastline of ~40 km. This definition will be used to scope “Gaza Strip.”\n\nWhy this question: Whether such a board will be formally created (as opposed to merely proposed) by year-end 2025 is uncertain and depends on diplomatic dynamics among the U.S., Israel, regional states, Palestinians, and potentially the UN. The presence of named individuals (e.g., Tony Blair) in proposal-stage materials increases plausibility but is not determinative of formal constitution. The question focuses on a concrete, verifiable act of constituting a specific type of supervisory body, rather than broader, more ambiguous political outcomes.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"262424dd8c2e49b6\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Resolution window and time standard:\n- Eligible events must occur between 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC. All dates/times are in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).\n\nQuestion resolves Yes if, within the window above, there is an official act that constitutes an international supervisory board meeting all of the criteria below, and that act publicly names at least two individual members. Otherwise, resolves No at 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC.\n\nDefinitions and required features:\n- Gaza Strip: The territory defined at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip (borders, scope).\n- Supervisory board (name-agnostic): Any body, regardless of formal title (e.g., “Board of Peace,” “International Transitional Board for Gaza,” “Supervisory Council for Gaza Transition”), that explicitly has a remit to oversee or supervise the transitional governance arrangement for the Gaza Strip. For this question, “oversee or supervise transitional governance” means the body is expressly tasked with supervision/oversight of the temporary administrative arrangement responsible for day-to-day public services/municipal administration in Gaza pending a subsequent, reformed governing authority; this is the function described in the White House 20-point plan for a proposed “Board of Peace”. A body whose remit is solely reconstruction finance or economic redevelopment without explicit supervision of transitional governance does not qualify.\n- Constituted (or established/created/formed): There is an official act that brings the body into legal/organizational existence and states its remit and composition. Acceptable constituting acts include (a) a White House/Executive Office publication such as a signed executive order, presidential memorandum, or official joint statement that explicitly creates the board; (b) an official intergovernmental agreement or joint communique published on the primary government websites of the named participating states that explicitly creates the board; or (c) a UN Security Council or UN General Assembly resolution explicitly establishing the board with the remit above, published on un.org. The constituting document must list at least two individual members by personal name (not just institutions, countries, or unnamed roles).\n- Publicly named members: The constituting act must publicly name at least two living individuals as members of the board (e.g., “Tony Blair,” “Donald J. Trump,” “Jane Doe”). Listing only countries, organizations, or vacant roles (“to be announced”) does not satisfy this criterion.\n- International board: The body must involve participation from at least two sovereign states’ governments or an intergovernmental organization (e.g., UN), as evidenced by the constituting act’s issuers or the named members’ official affiliation.\n\nInclusions:\n- The board’s name may differ from “Board of Peace” and still qualify if the remit is clearly the supervisory oversight of Gaza’s transitional governance (as defined above) and other criteria are met.\n\nExclusions and clarifications:\n- Media reports or leaks without a primary official constituting document are insufficient for a Yes resolution. Statements by private individuals or NGOs (e.g., foundations, institutes) are insufficient unless reproduced within an official constituting act.\n- An advisory panel with no stated remit to supervise/oversee transitional governance, or a body focused only on reconstruction finance, does not qualify.\n- Announcements before 2025-10-15 UTC do not count toward resolution; only acts dated within the window qualify.\n\nPrimary resolution sources (examples):\n- White House publications (e.g., whitehouse.gov/briefing-room or equivalent executive actions) for any U.S.-led constituting act.\n- UN documentation (e.g., UN Security Council/General Assembly resolutions at un.org) for any UN-established board.\n- Official government websites of participating states (e.g., gov.uk, mfa.gov.il, pmo.gov.il, mfa.gov.eg, mfa.gov.qa) for joint communiques or treaty texts.\n\nVerification steps for a Yes outcome:\n1) Locate the constituting document on an official government or UN website within the time window.\n2) Confirm the document explicitly establishes the board, states supervision/oversight of Gaza’s transitional governance as a remit, and lists at least two named individual members.\n3) Confirm the document date/time falls within 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\nIf multiple sources conflict, primary official documents take precedence over media summaries. In case of persistent ambiguity (e.g., no primary constituting document found), resolve No.\n\nContext sources informing this question’s framing and current status: The White House’s published 20-point plan description of a proposed “Board of Peace” and its remit , and contemporaneous Reuters reporting describing the board as proposed and led by Trump with Blair referenced. The geographical scope of the Gaza Strip is defined per Wikipedia.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40667, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763510817.059177, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.6 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763510817.059177, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.6 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.65, 0.35 ], "means": [ 0.39260465116279075 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 5.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 1.0, 11.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 8.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 12.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 86, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-10-01:\n- On 2025-09-29, the White House published a 20-point plan proposing that Gaza be governed temporarily by a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee under the oversight and supervision of a new international transitional body referred to as a “Board of Peace,” to be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump, with other members to be announced, including former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. The board would set the framework and handle funding for redevelopment until a reformed Palestinian Authority could take over. Reuters reporting on 2025-09-29 similarly described the “Board of Peace” as a proposed international overseer board led by Trump, with Tony Blair mentioned for an undefined role; Gaza’s day-to-day services would be run by a technocratic committee overseen by this board. These descriptions indicate a proposal rather than an already-established body as of the reporting dates.\n- Geography/definition: The Gaza Strip (Gaza) is a Palestinian territory in the Southern Levant, bordered by Egypt (SW) and Israel (E and N), about 41 km long and 6–12 km wide, area ~365 km². It includes Gaza City and other towns such as Khan Yunis and Rafah. It has a Mediterranean coastline of ~40 km. This definition will be used to scope “Gaza Strip.”\n\nWhy this question: Whether such a board will be formally created (as opposed to merely proposed) by year-end 2025 is uncertain and depends on diplomatic dynamics among the U.S., Israel, regional states, Palestinians, and potentially the UN. The presence of named individuals (e.g., Tony Blair) in proposal-stage materials increases plausibility but is not determinative of formal constitution. The question focuses on a concrete, verifiable act of constituting a specific type of supervisory body, rather than broader, more ambiguous political outcomes.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"262424dd8c2e49b6\"}}`" }, { "id": 40666, "title": "Will the European Commission designate at least one general-purpose AI (GPAI) model as having systemic risk by December 31, 2025?", "short_title": "Will the European Commission designate at least one general-purpose AI (GPAI) model as having system", "url_title": "Will the European Commission designate at least one general-purpose AI (GPAI) model as having system", "slug": "will-the-european-commission-designate-at-least-one-general-purpose-ai-gpai-model-as-having-system", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:18.619030Z", "published_at": "2025-11-18T23:02:47Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-19T00:33:00.193491Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:18.870831Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-19T00:32:47Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-19T00:32:47Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-18T23:02:47Z", "nr_forecasters": 85, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40262, "title": "Will the European Commission designate at least one general-purpose AI (GPAI) model as having systemic risk by December 31, 2025?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:18.619666Z", "open_time": "2025-11-18T23:02:47Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-19T00:32:47Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-19T00:32:47Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-19T00:32:47Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-19T00:32:47Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Context as of 2025-09-30:\n- Legal framework: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (the EU Artificial Intelligence Act) defines general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and establishes a category of \"GPAI models with systemic risk\". It sets conditions for classification and requires the European Commission to maintain a public list of such models.\n- Applicability timeline: The EU stated that rules for GPAI models begin applying from 2 August 2025, with additional guidance and templates published in July–August 2025 to support compliance.\n- Key actors: The European Commission oversees designation and publication for models with systemic risk; Member States share enforcement roles. Commission guidelines indicate notification and oversight processes involving the EU AI Office for GPAI models.\n\nDefinitions and key provisions (authoritative legal text):\n- \"General-purpose AI model\": \"an AI model, including where such an AI model is trained with a large amount of data using self-supervision at scale, that displays significant generality and is capable of competently performing a wide range of distinct tasks regardless of the way the model is placed on the market and that can be integrated into a variety of downstream systems or applications, except AI models that are used for research, development or prototyping activities before they are placed on the market\" (Article 3(63)). See: EUR-Lex (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng\n- \"Systemic risk\": \"a risk that is specific to the high-impact capabilities of general-purpose AI models, having a significant impact on the Union market due to their reach, or due to actual or reasonably foreseeable negative effects on public health, safety, public security, fundamental rights, or the society as a whole, that can be propagated at scale across the value chain\" (Article 3(65)).\n- Classification of GPAI models with systemic risk (Article 51): A GPAI model is classified as having systemic risk if either: (a) it has high-impact capabilities evaluated via technical tools/benchmarks; or (b) by Commission decision (ex officio or following a qualified alert from the scientific panel) it has equivalent capabilities/impact per criteria in Annex XIII (Article 51(1)). There is a presumption of high-impact capabilities when cumulative training compute exceeds 10^25 floating-point operations (FLOPs) (Article 51(2)). The Commission may update thresholds via delegated acts (Article 51(3)).\n- Annex XIII criteria for designation: Includes number of parameters; data quality/size (tokens); amount of compute used; input/output modalities; benchmarks and capability evaluations; reach in the internal market (presumed if ≥10,000 registered EU business users); number of registered end-users (Annex XIII).\n- Publication requirement: \"The Commission shall ensure that a list of general-purpose AI models with systemic risk is published and shall keep that list up to date\" (Article 52(6)). Providers meeting the presumption condition must notify the Commission within two weeks (Article 52(1)).\n\nRecent status and guidance:\n- The Commission announced GPAI rules start applying from 2 August 2025 and published guidelines on obligations and a training data disclosure template; the GPAI Code of Practice is recognized as a voluntary compliance tool. Commission materials describe notification processes and that the AI Office will supervise and enforce these obligations.\n\nWhy this question is forecastable and non-trivial:\n- Whether at least one GPAI model will be designated as having systemic risk by year-end depends on model capabilities, provider notifications (e.g., hitting the 10^25 FLOPs threshold), Commission evaluation under Annex XIII, and administrative timing to publish the list or a formal decision. These factors introduce genuine uncertainty and room for research-driven forecasting.\n\nUseful links for forecasters:\n- EU AI Act legal text on EUR-Lex: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng\n- European Commission AI policy pages (context and updates): https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/eu-rules-general-purpose-ai-models-start-apply-bringing-more-transparency-safety-and-accountability ; https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/general-purpose-ai-models-ai-act-questions-answers\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"b12056cb857204e7\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "This question resolves based on official EU publications between 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC and 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\nPrimary resolution source:\n- The European Commission’s official list of \"general-purpose AI models with systemic risk\" required by Article 52(6) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Resolve Yes if, by 23:59:59 UTC on December 31, 2025, the Commission’s published list contains at least one entry; resolve No otherwise.\n\nSecondary resolution source (if needed):\n- If the list is inaccessible or not yet published, resolve Yes if there is an official Commission decision published in the Official Journal of the European Union explicitly designating at least one GPAI model as a \"general-purpose AI model with systemic risk\" under Article 51(1)(b) by the deadline; resolve No otherwise.\n\nClarifications and definitions for resolution:\n- \"General-purpose AI model\" and \"systemic risk\" are defined in Article 3(63) and Article 3(65) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689.\n- \"Designated as having systemic risk\" means either inclusion on the Commission’s list mandated by Article 52(6) or a formal Commission decision under Article 51(1)(b) identifying a specific model as a GPAI model with systemic risk.\n- Only official EU publications count (European Commission websites/pages for the list; EUR-Lex/Official Journal for decisions). Provider self-disclosures or press reports do not count unless corroborated by the above official sources.\n- Time zone: All dates/times are in UTC.\n- Eligible events are those published within the window from 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC through 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\nBackground claims and legal references cited: definitions, classification conditions, presumption threshold 10^25 FLOPs, Annex XIII criteria, and publication requirement are from the EUR-Lex text of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Applicability from 2 August 2025, enforcement context, and Commission guidelines/templates are from the European Commission’s digital-strategy page (news/update). Additional explanatory context about designation processes and AI Office supervision/notification appears in the Commission’s Q&A materials.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40666, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763509256.97944, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 85, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.65 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763509256.97944, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 85, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.65 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.65, 0.35 ], "means": [ 0.4299372549019608 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 7.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 14.0, 0.0, 2.0, 2.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 9.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 9.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 7.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 85, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Context as of 2025-09-30:\n- Legal framework: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (the EU Artificial Intelligence Act) defines general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and establishes a category of \"GPAI models with systemic risk\". It sets conditions for classification and requires the European Commission to maintain a public list of such models.\n- Applicability timeline: The EU stated that rules for GPAI models begin applying from 2 August 2025, with additional guidance and templates published in July–August 2025 to support compliance.\n- Key actors: The European Commission oversees designation and publication for models with systemic risk; Member States share enforcement roles. Commission guidelines indicate notification and oversight processes involving the EU AI Office for GPAI models.\n\nDefinitions and key provisions (authoritative legal text):\n- \"General-purpose AI model\": \"an AI model, including where such an AI model is trained with a large amount of data using self-supervision at scale, that displays significant generality and is capable of competently performing a wide range of distinct tasks regardless of the way the model is placed on the market and that can be integrated into a variety of downstream systems or applications, except AI models that are used for research, development or prototyping activities before they are placed on the market\" (Article 3(63)). See: EUR-Lex (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng\n- \"Systemic risk\": \"a risk that is specific to the high-impact capabilities of general-purpose AI models, having a significant impact on the Union market due to their reach, or due to actual or reasonably foreseeable negative effects on public health, safety, public security, fundamental rights, or the society as a whole, that can be propagated at scale across the value chain\" (Article 3(65)).\n- Classification of GPAI models with systemic risk (Article 51): A GPAI model is classified as having systemic risk if either: (a) it has high-impact capabilities evaluated via technical tools/benchmarks; or (b) by Commission decision (ex officio or following a qualified alert from the scientific panel) it has equivalent capabilities/impact per criteria in Annex XIII (Article 51(1)). There is a presumption of high-impact capabilities when cumulative training compute exceeds 10^25 floating-point operations (FLOPs) (Article 51(2)). The Commission may update thresholds via delegated acts (Article 51(3)).\n- Annex XIII criteria for designation: Includes number of parameters; data quality/size (tokens); amount of compute used; input/output modalities; benchmarks and capability evaluations; reach in the internal market (presumed if ≥10,000 registered EU business users); number of registered end-users (Annex XIII).\n- Publication requirement: \"The Commission shall ensure that a list of general-purpose AI models with systemic risk is published and shall keep that list up to date\" (Article 52(6)). Providers meeting the presumption condition must notify the Commission within two weeks (Article 52(1)).\n\nRecent status and guidance:\n- The Commission announced GPAI rules start applying from 2 August 2025 and published guidelines on obligations and a training data disclosure template; the GPAI Code of Practice is recognized as a voluntary compliance tool. Commission materials describe notification processes and that the AI Office will supervise and enforce these obligations.\n\nWhy this question is forecastable and non-trivial:\n- Whether at least one GPAI model will be designated as having systemic risk by year-end depends on model capabilities, provider notifications (e.g., hitting the 10^25 FLOPs threshold), Commission evaluation under Annex XIII, and administrative timing to publish the list or a formal decision. These factors introduce genuine uncertainty and room for research-driven forecasting.\n\nUseful links for forecasters:\n- EU AI Act legal text on EUR-Lex: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng\n- European Commission AI policy pages (context and updates): https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/eu-rules-general-purpose-ai-models-start-apply-bringing-more-transparency-safety-and-accountability ; https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/general-purpose-ai-models-ai-act-questions-answers\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"b12056cb857204e7\"}}`" }, { "id": 40665, "title": "Will NATO’s North Atlantic Council publish an official statement between 15 Oct and 31 Dec 2025 explicitly citing a Russian violation of Allied airspace?", "short_title": "Will NATO’s North Atlantic Council publish an official statement between 15 Oct and 31 Dec 2025 expl", "url_title": "Will NATO’s North Atlantic Council publish an official statement between 15 Oct and 31 Dec 2025 expl", "slug": "will-natos-north-atlantic-council-publish-an-official-statement-between-15-oct-and-31-dec-2025-expl", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:18.192840Z", "published_at": "2025-11-18T19:44:47Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T21:15:00.434828Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:18.445629Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-18T21:14:47Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-18T21:14:47Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-18T19:44:47Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40261, "title": "Will NATO’s North Atlantic Council publish an official statement between 15 Oct and 31 Dec 2025 explicitly citing a Russian violation of Allied airspace?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:18.193246Z", "open_time": "2025-11-18T19:44:47Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-18T21:14:47Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-18T21:14:47Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-18T21:14:47Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-18T21:14:47Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Context as of 2025-10-01\n- What the NAC is: The North Atlantic Council (NAC) is NATO’s principal political decision‑making body; its decisions are by unanimity/common accord and it issues communiqués and statements that represent the collective will of all member states.\n- Recent precedent: On 23 Sep 2025, NATO published a “Statement by the North Atlantic Council on recent airspace violations by Russia,” condemning Russia’s violation of Estonian airspace on 19 Sep and noting earlier large‑scale violations of Polish airspace by Russian drones; it also stated that several other Allies (Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Romania) had recently experienced airspace violations by Russia. A same‑day press conference by the Secretary General referenced three armed MiG‑31 fighter jets violating Estonian airspace and Russian drones violating Polish airspace. These meetings followed Article 4 consultations (Poland on 10 Sep 2025; Estonia on 23 Sep 2025).\n- Definitions relevant to “Allied airspace”: “Allied” refers to NATO member countries. NATO has 32 members as of 2025; Finland joined in 2023 and Sweden in 2024 (see NATO’s membership overview). Under international civil aviation law, each state has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory (Chicago Convention Article 1), and “territory” means a state’s land areas and adjacent territorial waters (Article 2). Thus, “Allied airspace” means the airspace above the territory (including territorial waters) of any NATO member state.\n- Where NAC statements are published: NAC statements are issued as NATO “Official texts” on nato.int; these documents are public expressions of Alliance policy/decisions. The 23 Sep 2025 NAC statement provides an example of the exact format and venue.\nWhy this may be uncertain: Russia’s pattern of airspace violations and Allies’ recourse to Article 4 consultations make further NAC messaging plausible, but issuance of another NAC statement specifically citing a Russian violation within Q4 2025 is not guaranteed and will depend on events and intra‑Alliance consensus.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"acd335c08c3d6619\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Binary resolution (Yes/No), based on NATO’s official website.\nTime window\n- Eligible publication date window (inclusive): 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n- Determining the date: Use the date displayed on the NATO “Official text” page. If a page is updated later, use the date displayed on the page as of 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\nWhat counts for “Yes”\n- A document on nato.int that satisfies all of the following:\n 1) Issuer and venue: The page is an “Official text” whose title begins with “Statement by the North Atlantic Council …” and is hosted under the natohq/official_texts section (e.g., like the 23 Sep 2025 NAC statement). Statements by other NATO bodies or by the Secretary General alone, press conferences, news items, or speeches do not count.\n 2) Explicit content: Within the body text, the statement explicitly attributes at least one violation of airspace to Russia, concerning the airspace of a NATO member country (i.e., “Allied airspace”). This condition is met if the text contains in the same sentence: (a) “Russia” or “Russian,” (b) the word “airspace,” and (c) one of: “violation,” “violated,” “breach,” “breached,” or “incursion,” referring to conduct by Russia. References may be specific (e.g., “violated Estonian airspace”) or generic (e.g., “airspace violations by Russia” affecting Allies).\n 3) Allied airspace definition: “Allied” means any NATO member state; as of 2025 there are 32 members (Finland joined 2023; Sweden 2024). “Airspace” is interpreted per the Chicago Convention: the airspace above a state’s territory (land areas and territorial waters).\n- If multiple qualifying NAC statements are published in the window, the question resolves “Yes” upon the first that satisfies all criteria.\nWhat counts for “No”\n- No qualifying NAC statement meeting all the above criteria is published within the stated window.\nSource of truth for resolution\n- NATO’s official website pages for “Official texts,” specifically NAC statements (example of format: the 23 Sep 2025 NAC statement). Background and definitional context for NAC statements is provided on NATO’s NAC topic page. For interpreting “Allied airspace,” use NATO’s membership overview and the Chicago Convention Articles 1 and 2.\nNotes and examples\n- Example that would qualify (by structure and language): A page titled “Statement by the North Atlantic Council on [topic]” published on nato.int/…/official_texts_XXXXX.htm during the window, with wording like “Russian drones violated Polish airspace” or “three Russian fighter jets violated Estonian airspace,” analogous to the 23 Sep 2025 statement.\n- Non‑qualifying examples: A Secretary General press conference referring to violations (not an NAC “Official text”) ; a NATO news article; or an NAC statement that mentions “air incidents” without attributing an airspace violation to Russia.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40665, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763497907.156127, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.255 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763497907.156127, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.255 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.65, 0.35 ], "means": [ 0.3520813953488373 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 9.0, 1.0, 1.0, 2.0, 0.0, 12.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 23.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 6.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 86, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Context as of 2025-10-01\n- What the NAC is: The North Atlantic Council (NAC) is NATO’s principal political decision‑making body; its decisions are by unanimity/common accord and it issues communiqués and statements that represent the collective will of all member states.\n- Recent precedent: On 23 Sep 2025, NATO published a “Statement by the North Atlantic Council on recent airspace violations by Russia,” condemning Russia’s violation of Estonian airspace on 19 Sep and noting earlier large‑scale violations of Polish airspace by Russian drones; it also stated that several other Allies (Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Romania) had recently experienced airspace violations by Russia. A same‑day press conference by the Secretary General referenced three armed MiG‑31 fighter jets violating Estonian airspace and Russian drones violating Polish airspace. These meetings followed Article 4 consultations (Poland on 10 Sep 2025; Estonia on 23 Sep 2025).\n- Definitions relevant to “Allied airspace”: “Allied” refers to NATO member countries. NATO has 32 members as of 2025; Finland joined in 2023 and Sweden in 2024 (see NATO’s membership overview). Under international civil aviation law, each state has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory (Chicago Convention Article 1), and “territory” means a state’s land areas and adjacent territorial waters (Article 2). Thus, “Allied airspace” means the airspace above the territory (including territorial waters) of any NATO member state.\n- Where NAC statements are published: NAC statements are issued as NATO “Official texts” on nato.int; these documents are public expressions of Alliance policy/decisions. The 23 Sep 2025 NAC statement provides an example of the exact format and venue.\nWhy this may be uncertain: Russia’s pattern of airspace violations and Allies’ recourse to Article 4 consultations make further NAC messaging plausible, but issuance of another NAC statement specifically citing a Russian violation within Q4 2025 is not guaranteed and will depend on events and intra‑Alliance consensus.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"acd335c08c3d6619\"}}`" }, { "id": 40664, "title": "IMF Executive Board completion of Pakistan’s EFF second review between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC)", "short_title": "IMF Executive Board completion of Pakistan’s EFF second review between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UT", "url_title": "IMF Executive Board completion of Pakistan’s EFF second review between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UT", "slug": "imf-executive-board-completion-of-pakistans-eff-second-review-between-2025-10-15-and-2025-12-31-ut", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:17.830186Z", "published_at": "2025-11-18T11:23:43Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T12:54:00.235628Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:18.020411Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-18T12:53:43Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-18T12:53:43Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-18T11:23:43Z", "nr_forecasters": 78, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40260, "title": "IMF Executive Board completion of Pakistan’s EFF second review between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC)", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:17.830602Z", "open_time": "2025-11-18T11:23:43Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-18T12:53:43Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-18T12:53:43Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-18T12:53:43Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-18T12:53:43Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Overview and status quo as of 2025-09-30:\n- Program basics: Pakistan’s 37‑month Extended Fund Facility (EFF) arrangement was approved by the IMF Executive Board on September 25, 2024, to support macroeconomic stabilization and reforms. On May 9, 2025, the Executive Board completed the first review of the EFF and simultaneously approved an arrangement under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF); the first review decision enabled an immediate disbursement of around US$1 billion (SDR 760 million) under the EFF.\n- What an EFF “review” is: Under the EFF, the IMF conducts periodic program reviews that assess compliance with quantitative performance criteria and progress on structural reforms. Access to IMF resources is phased; review “completion” permits release of the next disbursement tranche subject to program conditions.\n- Current timeline signals: Reuters reported on May 23, 2025 that the IMF expected the next Pakistan funding review in the second half of 2025. Reuters also reported on September 13, 2025 that an IMF review mission in September would assess, among other items, whether the FY26 budget’s spending allocations and emergency provisions were sufficiently agile to address flood‑related needs—indicating active second‑review work in September 2025.\n- Where the IMF posts official decisions: The IMF’s Pakistan country page hosts official IMF reports and Executive Board documents related to Pakistan and links to news items; Executive Board decisions on program reviews are typically announced via IMF News press releases (e.g., the May 9, 2025 first‑review press release) and/or associated Board documents posted from the country page.\n\nWhy this is forecastable now: As of end‑September 2025, the second review appears to be underway but not yet completed. Completion by year‑end will depend on Pakistan’s performance against end‑period targets, fiscal and energy reforms, and the pace of Board scheduling—factors that forecasters can analyze using public macro data, fiscal/budget measures, and mission communications.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"3da4e89a30168825\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Question: Between 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC, will the IMF Executive Board complete the second review of Pakistan’s Extended Fund Facility (EFF) arrangement?\n\nDefinitions and scope:\n- Extended Fund Facility (EFF): The IMF’s medium‑term lending instrument for countries with protracted balance‑of‑payments needs; reviews assess implementation against quantitative performance criteria and structural benchmarks, and completion enables phased disbursements.\n- Second review: The second periodic program review under Pakistan’s EFF arrangement approved by the IMF Executive Board on September 25, 2024 (i.e., the arrangement referenced in the IMF’s May 9, 2025 press release on the first review). This question is only about the EFF second review; RSF reviews or Article IV consultations do not count.\n- Complete/Completion: “Completion” means the IMF Executive Board has formally decided to complete the second review, as evidenced by an IMF News press release stating that the Executive Board completed the second review under the EFF arrangement for Pakistan (using standard IMF language such as “Executive Board completes the [nth] review…”), and/or the issuance of official Executive Board documents reflecting that decision. Staff‑level agreements, end‑of‑mission statements, or mission press briefings without a Board decision do not count.\n- Time window and time zone: The event must occur between 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (inclusive). For adjudication, use the Board decision date as stated in the IMF press release or Board document. If the press release is dated outside the window but the text states, “On [DATE], the Executive Board completed…,” use that [DATE]. If the decision date is not stated, use the press release dateline (converted to UTC).\n\nResolution sources (primary and fallbacks):\n- Primary: IMF News press release announcing that the Executive Board completed the second review of Pakistan’s EFF (example of phrasing in a first‑review press release: Press Release No. 25/137). The press release and/or associated Board documents are typically accessible via the IMF Pakistan country page.\n- Acceptable fallbacks if the primary source is temporarily unavailable: Any official IMF Executive Board document posted from the Pakistan country page indicating that the second review was completed on a specific date within the window. If official IMF web properties are broadly inaccessible, use credible wire services reporting the Board’s completion decision (e.g., Reuters), provided the reports clearly state that the Executive Board completed the EFF second review and on which date.\n\nAdjudication:\n- YES if the IMF Executive Board completes the second review as defined above, with a decision date within the stated window.\n- NO if no such Executive Board completion occurs within the window.\n\nExclusions and clarifications:\n- Staff‑level agreements, end‑of‑mission statements, or mission visit announcements do not count without a subsequent Executive Board completion decision.\n- RSF review completions, Article IV consultations, or other IMF decisions unrelated to the EFF second review do not count.\n- If multiple decisions are taken the same day (e.g., joint EFF/RSF items), it still counts as YES provided the EFF second review completion is part of the Board decision.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40664, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763470258.651262, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 78, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.78 ], "centers": [ 0.85 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.88 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763470258.651262, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 78, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.78 ], "centers": [ 0.85 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.88 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.15000000000000002, 0.85 ], "means": [ 0.8123589743589746 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 3.0, 1.0, 3.0, 25.0, 1.0, 1.0, 3.0, 0.0, 8.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 6.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 78, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Overview and status quo as of 2025-09-30:\n- Program basics: Pakistan’s 37‑month Extended Fund Facility (EFF) arrangement was approved by the IMF Executive Board on September 25, 2024, to support macroeconomic stabilization and reforms. On May 9, 2025, the Executive Board completed the first review of the EFF and simultaneously approved an arrangement under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF); the first review decision enabled an immediate disbursement of around US$1 billion (SDR 760 million) under the EFF.\n- What an EFF “review” is: Under the EFF, the IMF conducts periodic program reviews that assess compliance with quantitative performance criteria and progress on structural reforms. Access to IMF resources is phased; review “completion” permits release of the next disbursement tranche subject to program conditions.\n- Current timeline signals: Reuters reported on May 23, 2025 that the IMF expected the next Pakistan funding review in the second half of 2025. Reuters also reported on September 13, 2025 that an IMF review mission in September would assess, among other items, whether the FY26 budget’s spending allocations and emergency provisions were sufficiently agile to address flood‑related needs—indicating active second‑review work in September 2025.\n- Where the IMF posts official decisions: The IMF’s Pakistan country page hosts official IMF reports and Executive Board documents related to Pakistan and links to news items; Executive Board decisions on program reviews are typically announced via IMF News press releases (e.g., the May 9, 2025 first‑review press release) and/or associated Board documents posted from the country page.\n\nWhy this is forecastable now: As of end‑September 2025, the second review appears to be underway but not yet completed. Completion by year‑end will depend on Pakistan’s performance against end‑period targets, fiscal and energy reforms, and the pace of Board scheduling—factors that forecasters can analyze using public macro data, fiscal/budget measures, and mission communications.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"3da4e89a30168825\"}}`" }, { "id": 40663, "title": "Between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (inclusive, UTC), will at least 7 CISA KEV entries affecting Microsoft Windows be added?", "short_title": "Between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (inclusive, UTC), will at least 7 CISA KEV entries affecting Micro", "url_title": "Between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (inclusive, UTC), will at least 7 CISA KEV entries affecting Micro", "slug": "between-2025-10-15-and-2025-12-31-inclusive-utc-will-at-least-7-cisa-kev-entries-affecting-micro", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:17.359283Z", "published_at": "2025-11-18T08:01:40Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T09:32:00.229627Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:17.653091Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-18T09:31:40Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-18T09:31:40Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-18T08:01:40Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40259, "title": "Between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (inclusive, UTC), will at least 7 CISA KEV entries affecting Microsoft Windows be added?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:17.359701Z", "open_time": "2025-11-18T08:01:40Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-18T09:31:40Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-18T09:31:40Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-18T09:31:40Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-18T09:31:40Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Context a forecaster should know as of 2025-09-30:\n- CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) Catalog is an authoritative list of vulnerabilities known to be exploited in the wild and is intended to help organizations prioritize remediation. CISA publishes the KEV data in machine-readable feeds (CSV and JSON) and describes them on the main KEV catalog page.\n- The official KEV JSON schema includes per-entry fields such as: cveID (string), vendorProject (string), product (string), and dateAdded (string, format YYYY-MM-DD). The schema defines dateAdded as the date a vulnerability was added to the catalog, and the catalog’s release timestamp is represented in UTC (for the catalog-level releaseDateTime field). The live KEV JSON feed includes these fields for each entry (e.g., dateAdded “YYYY-MM-DD”, vendorProject, product, cveID).\n- Windows 10 reaches end of support on October 14, 2025 (final version is 22H2; monthly updates continue through that date) per Microsoft’s lifecycle documentation. Microsoft’s consumer-facing support page reiterates that after October 14, 2025, Windows 10 devices will no longer receive security updates. This makes the late-2025 period an interesting window for tracking exploited Windows vulnerabilities.\n\nKey links for verification and context:\n- KEV catalog landing page: https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog \n- KEV JSON feed (source of truth for resolution): https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/feeds/known_exploited_vulnerabilities.json \n- KEV JSON schema (field names/definitions): https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/feeds/known_exploited_vulnerabilities_schema.json \n- Microsoft Windows 10 lifecycle reference: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/windows-10-home-and-pro \n- Microsoft Windows 10 end-of-support page: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-10-support-ends-on-october-14-2025-2ca8b313-1946-43d3-b55c-2b95b107f281\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"5fa1e889a08b14da\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "How this resolves (clear, unambiguous, and reproducible):\n- Resolution time: Determine the outcome at 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n- Source of truth (primary): CISA’s KEV JSON feed at https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/feeds/known_exploited_vulnerabilities.json as published by CISA by the resolution time. Schema for field names is at https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/feeds/known_exploited_vulnerabilities_schema.json. If the JSON feed is unavailable at resolution time, use the KEV CSV at https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/csv/known_exploited_vulnerabilities.csv with logically equivalent filtering. As a last resort, use the KEV web catalog (same landing URL) to manually count qualifying entries.\n\nOperational definitions (what counts as “affecting Microsoft Windows”):\n- Use only entries where:\n 1) vendorProject equals the exact string \"Microsoft\" (field name per schema) , and\n 2) product contains the substring \"Windows\" (case-insensitive) in the product field.\n- Examples that should count (non-exhaustive, provided these appear in KEV): \"Windows\", \"Windows Server\", \"Windows Kernel\", \"Windows Print Spooler\", \"Windows DNS Server\", \"Windows SMBv3\", etc. Examples that should not count: Microsoft products without the substring \"Windows\" in the product field (e.g., \"Internet Explorer\", \"Office\"), unless KEV’s product string itself contains \"Windows\".\n\nCounting rule:\n- Consider all KEV entries that satisfy the above definition and whose dateAdded (per-entry field; format YYYY-MM-DD) falls between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 inclusive (treat the dates as they appear in the KEV feed; do not reinterpret time zones since dateAdded is a date without time). Count distinct cveID values meeting these criteria.\n\nOutcome mapping:\n- YES if the count is greater than or equal to 7.\n- NO otherwise.\n\nNotes and tie-breaking:\n- The KEV feed and schema are maintained by CISA and are considered authoritative for what is known to be exploited in the wild.\n- If CISA later backfills entries with dateAdded within the window but those entries were not present in KEV by the resolution time, they do NOT count. The determination is based on the KEV data available by 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n- Do not use any fields other than vendorProject, product, cveID, and dateAdded for inclusion/exclusion. Do not infer from CVE descriptions or external sources; rely strictly on the KEV feed fields.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40663, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763455358.157694, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.35 ], "centers": [ 0.52 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.6833333333333332 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763455358.157694, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.35 ], "centers": [ 0.52 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.6833333333333332 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.48, 0.52 ], "means": [ 0.5180794573643408 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0, 3.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 5.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 8.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 7.0, 0.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, 8.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 86, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Context a forecaster should know as of 2025-09-30:\n- CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) Catalog is an authoritative list of vulnerabilities known to be exploited in the wild and is intended to help organizations prioritize remediation. CISA publishes the KEV data in machine-readable feeds (CSV and JSON) and describes them on the main KEV catalog page.\n- The official KEV JSON schema includes per-entry fields such as: cveID (string), vendorProject (string), product (string), and dateAdded (string, format YYYY-MM-DD). The schema defines dateAdded as the date a vulnerability was added to the catalog, and the catalog’s release timestamp is represented in UTC (for the catalog-level releaseDateTime field). The live KEV JSON feed includes these fields for each entry (e.g., dateAdded “YYYY-MM-DD”, vendorProject, product, cveID).\n- Windows 10 reaches end of support on October 14, 2025 (final version is 22H2; monthly updates continue through that date) per Microsoft’s lifecycle documentation. Microsoft’s consumer-facing support page reiterates that after October 14, 2025, Windows 10 devices will no longer receive security updates. This makes the late-2025 period an interesting window for tracking exploited Windows vulnerabilities.\n\nKey links for verification and context:\n- KEV catalog landing page: https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog \n- KEV JSON feed (source of truth for resolution): https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/feeds/known_exploited_vulnerabilities.json \n- KEV JSON schema (field names/definitions): https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/feeds/known_exploited_vulnerabilities_schema.json \n- Microsoft Windows 10 lifecycle reference: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/windows-10-home-and-pro \n- Microsoft Windows 10 end-of-support page: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/windows-10-support-ends-on-october-14-2025-2ca8b313-1946-43d3-b55c-2b95b107f281\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"5fa1e889a08b14da\"}}`" }, { "id": 40662, "title": "Will the U.S. CPI-U (All items, U.S. city average, not seasonally adjusted) 12-month percent change for November 2025 be at least 3.0%?", "short_title": "Will the U.S. CPI-U (All items, U.S. city average, not seasonally adjusted) 12-month percent change", "url_title": "Will the U.S. CPI-U (All items, U.S. city average, not seasonally adjusted) 12-month percent change", "slug": "will-the-us-cpi-u-all-items-us-city-average-not-seasonally-adjusted-12-month-percent-change", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:16.915244Z", "published_at": "2025-11-18T06:28:19Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T07:59:00.307327Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:17.121221Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-18T07:58:19Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-18T07:58:19Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-18T06:28:19Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40258, "title": "Will the U.S. CPI-U (All items, U.S. city average, not seasonally adjusted) 12-month percent change for November 2025 be at least 3.0%?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:16.915675Z", "open_time": "2025-11-18T06:28:19Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-18T07:58:19Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-18T07:58:19Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-18T07:58:19Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-18T07:58:19Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Overview and key definitions:\n- CPI-U (Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers) is the monthly measure of the average change over time in prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of goods and services, with data available for the U.S. City Average (national) and sub-areas. The “All items” index refers to the complete market basket; the BLS series ID CUUR0000SA0 denotes CPI-U, U.S. city average, all items, not seasonally adjusted.\n- The 12-month percent change (also called “over-the-year” change) is the percent change in the index level from a given month one year earlier; these 12-month changes are among the CPI’s most frequently referenced measures. The BLS advises using not seasonally adjusted indexes for escalation and notes that seasonally adjusted indexes are subject to revision, whereas unadjusted indexes are used for longer-term price movement and are not subject to regular revision; press releases prominently show the unadjusted 12-month changes.\n\nStatus quo as of today (2025-09-30):\n- In the latest available BLS CPI press materials, the all items CPI-U increased 2.9% over the 12 months ending August 2025 (not seasonally adjusted). This value appears in the CPI “Consumer Price Index Summary” release and accompanying materials.\n\nRelease timing and resolution feasibility:\n- BLS publishes CPI news releases on a fixed schedule at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time (ET). The September 2025 CPI is scheduled for Wednesday, October 15, 2025; the October 2025 CPI for Thursday, November 13, 2025; and the November 2025 CPI for Wednesday, December 10, 2025 (8:30 a.m. ET). These schedules ensure the November CPI release occurs in December, allowing resolution before year-end. The CPI \"Consumer Price Index Summary\" is posted at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm.\n\nWhat the forecaster should look at:\n- The resolution draws on the BLS “Consumer Price Index Summary” for November 2025. This page typically states the 12-month percent change for the all items index near the top (e.g., “The all items index rose X percent for the 12 months ending [month]”), and includes a \"Not seasonally adjusted\" section with index level and 12-month change. As a backup, Table 1 of the CPI release shows “All items” 12‑month percent change for the U.S. city average, not seasonally adjusted.\n\nWhy this target is non-trivial:\n- With the all-items CPI-U 12‑month change recently at 2.9% and energy/food components fluctuating, forecasters can reasonably disagree on whether November’s 12‑month rate will reach or exceed 3.0% by December 10. This question has balanced plausibility and resolves on an authoritative, regularly scheduled release.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"bcf240d1a041b5ed\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Resolve “Yes” if, upon publication of the BLS “Consumer Price Index Summary” for November 2025, the reported 12‑month percent change for CPI‑U All items (U.S. city average, not seasonally adjusted) is greater than or equal to 3.0%; otherwise resolve “No.”\n\nPrimary resolution source:\n- BLS “Consumer Price Index Summary” page (news release), as posted at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm. Use the value explicitly reported for the all items index’s 12‑month percent change for the 12 months ending November 2025. Interpret 3.0% using the value as printed by BLS in the news release (BLS typically reports this to one decimal place in text and tables).\n\nBackup resolution source (if the Summary page is inaccessible or lacks the figure):\n- BLS CPI Table 1: “Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U): U.S. city average, by expenditure category,” using the “All items” row and the “12‑month percent change” column for Nov. 2024–Nov. 2025 (not seasonally adjusted).\n\nScope and timing notes:\n- Only the all-items CPI‑U for the U.S. city average (series CUUR0000SA0) is relevant; sub‑indexes (e.g., core CPI) are not considered.\n- Use the first published value for the November 2025 release. If BLS issues an official correction by December 31, 2025, use the corrected figure; otherwise, resolve on the value publicly available as of December 31, 2025 (8:00 p.m. UTC). BLS not seasonally adjusted 12‑month measures are used for longer‑term movement and are not subject to routine post‑publication revision, whereas seasonally adjusted measures can be revised; hence reliance on the unadjusted 12‑month figure.\n- The November 2025 CPI news release is scheduled for Wednesday, December 10, 2025 at 8:30 a.m. ET (13:30 UTC), ensuring resolution before year‑end.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40662, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763450193.872453, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.45 ], "centers": [ 0.525 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.57 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763450193.872453, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.45 ], "centers": [ 0.525 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.57 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.475, 0.525 ], "means": [ 0.5118139534883721 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 15.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3.0, 1.0, 5.0, 1.0, 2.0, 16.0, 3.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 6.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 86, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Overview and key definitions:\n- CPI-U (Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers) is the monthly measure of the average change over time in prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of goods and services, with data available for the U.S. City Average (national) and sub-areas. The “All items” index refers to the complete market basket; the BLS series ID CUUR0000SA0 denotes CPI-U, U.S. city average, all items, not seasonally adjusted.\n- The 12-month percent change (also called “over-the-year” change) is the percent change in the index level from a given month one year earlier; these 12-month changes are among the CPI’s most frequently referenced measures. The BLS advises using not seasonally adjusted indexes for escalation and notes that seasonally adjusted indexes are subject to revision, whereas unadjusted indexes are used for longer-term price movement and are not subject to regular revision; press releases prominently show the unadjusted 12-month changes.\n\nStatus quo as of today (2025-09-30):\n- In the latest available BLS CPI press materials, the all items CPI-U increased 2.9% over the 12 months ending August 2025 (not seasonally adjusted). This value appears in the CPI “Consumer Price Index Summary” release and accompanying materials.\n\nRelease timing and resolution feasibility:\n- BLS publishes CPI news releases on a fixed schedule at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time (ET). The September 2025 CPI is scheduled for Wednesday, October 15, 2025; the October 2025 CPI for Thursday, November 13, 2025; and the November 2025 CPI for Wednesday, December 10, 2025 (8:30 a.m. ET). These schedules ensure the November CPI release occurs in December, allowing resolution before year-end. The CPI \"Consumer Price Index Summary\" is posted at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm.\n\nWhat the forecaster should look at:\n- The resolution draws on the BLS “Consumer Price Index Summary” for November 2025. This page typically states the 12-month percent change for the all items index near the top (e.g., “The all items index rose X percent for the 12 months ending [month]”), and includes a \"Not seasonally adjusted\" section with index level and 12-month change. As a backup, Table 1 of the CPI release shows “All items” 12‑month percent change for the U.S. city average, not seasonally adjusted.\n\nWhy this target is non-trivial:\n- With the all-items CPI-U 12‑month change recently at 2.9% and energy/food components fluctuating, forecasters can reasonably disagree on whether November’s 12‑month rate will reach or exceed 3.0% by December 10. This question has balanced plausibility and resolves on an authoritative, regularly scheduled release.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"bcf240d1a041b5ed\"}}`" }, { "id": 40661, "title": "Ariane 6: Will at least two Ariane 6 launches lift off between 00:00:00 UTC on Oct 15, 2025 and 23:59:59 UTC on Dec 31, 2025?", "short_title": "Ariane 6: Will at least two Ariane 6 launches lift off between 00:00:00 UTC on Oct 15, 2025 and 23:5", "url_title": "Ariane 6: Will at least two Ariane 6 launches lift off between 00:00:00 UTC on Oct 15, 2025 and 23:5", "slug": "ariane-6-will-at-least-two-ariane-6-launches-lift-off-between-000000-utc-on-oct-15-2025-and-235", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:16.490380Z", "published_at": "2025-11-17T17:15:34Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-17T18:46:00.203807Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:16.733879Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-17T18:45:34Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-17T18:45:34Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-17T17:15:34Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40257, "title": "Ariane 6: Will at least two Ariane 6 launches lift off between 00:00:00 UTC on Oct 15, 2025 and 23:59:59 UTC on Dec 31, 2025?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:16.490799Z", "open_time": "2025-11-17T17:15:34Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-17T18:45:34Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-17T18:45:34Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-17T18:45:34Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-17T18:45:34Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-10-01:\n- Ariane 6 is Europe’s current heavy-lift expendable launch system, operated by Arianespace and launched from ELA-4 at the Guiana Space Centre. It has two main configurations: Ariane 62 (two P120C solid boosters) and Ariane 64 (four boosters). The VAxxx flight numbering is used for Ariane missions. ESA’s Ariane page also recaps recent Ariane 6 launches and timing.\n- Confirmed 2025 launches to date:\n • VA263 (Ariane 62): First commercial flight launched the CSO-3 Earth observation satellite on March 6, 2025 at 16:24 UTC; the mission was successful.\n • VA264 (Ariane 62): Launched EUMETSAT’s Metop‑SG‑A1 (carrying the Copernicus Sentinel‑5 instrument) on August 12, 2025 at 21:37 local time in Kourou (00:37 UTC on August 13); the mission was successful.\n- Planned cadence in 2025: Arianespace stated a target of five Ariane 6 flights in 2025, primarily in the second half of the year.\n- Near-term outlook (late 2025): ESA indicates the Sentinel‑1D mission (VA265) on Ariane 6 is expected no earlier than the beginning of November 2025 at Europe’s Spaceport in Kourou, with exact date/time to be confirmed. ESA further confirms Sentinel‑1D arrived in French Guiana and that the launch campaign is underway for liftoff on Ariane 6 at the end of 2025.\n\nWhy this question has non-trivial uncertainty:\n- At least one late‑2025 Ariane 6 launch (Sentinel‑1D) is expected, but whether a second Ariane 6 launch will also occur between Oct 15 and year‑end depends on vehicle readiness, range availability, payload readiness (e.g., institutional or commercial missions), and production ramp‑up, all of which have seen changes in 2025 and remain subject to schedule risk.\n\nDefinitions and scope:\n- “Ariane 6” means any launch of the Ariane 6 family (Ariane 62 or Ariane 64). See background on variants and capabilities.\n- “Launch”/“liftoff” means the moment the rocket physically leaves the launch pad under its own power; pre‑launch operations, countdowns, or scrubs without liftoff do not count. Abort after liftoff still counts as a launch. The liftoff timestamp used for resolution is the official time reported by Arianespace or ESA.\n- “Between 00:00:00 UTC on Oct 15, 2025 and 23:59:59 UTC on Dec 31, 2025” is inclusive of both endpoints (UTC).\n- “At least two” means two or more distinct Ariane 6 liftoffs within the defined time window. Any mission designations (e.g., VAxxx) qualify if they are Ariane 6 flights.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"8ca1c0a4ba9dee16\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Yes if two or more Ariane 6 launches (any Ariane 6 variant: Ariane 62 or Ariane 64) achieve liftoff between 00:00:00 UTC on Oct 15, 2025 and 23:59:59 UTC on Dec 31, 2025, inclusive. No otherwise.\n\nPrimary resolution source: Arianespace’s official launch press releases/updates, which list liftoff dates/times and mission designations (e.g., the press materials for VA263/VA264). Use Arianespace’s newsroom/updates pages:\n- Newsroom main and press releases index: https://newsroom.arianespace.com/ (dynamic press site; used for VA263 and VA264 confirmations) \n- Updates page: https://www.arianespace.com/updates-en/ \n\nSecondary corroboration (if needed for cross‑check or if Arianespace pages are temporarily unavailable):\n- ESA Ariane page and relevant ESA mission pages, which provide official launch recaps and timing.\n- Credible launch logs/coverage such as Spaceflight Now’s Launch Schedule page for confirmation of liftoff timing and mission identification (used as a cross‑reference only).\n\nNotes:\n- The liftoff time is determined by the official timestamp in Arianespace/ESA communications. If a launch begins within the window by UTC and liftoff occurs, it counts even if subsequent events (e.g., stage failure) occur after liftoff.\n- Scrubs or postponements without liftoff do not count. Multiple liftoffs on the same calendar day count as separate launches if they are distinct Ariane 6 flights (which is improbable but defined for clarity).\n\nThis question resolves on or after December 31, 2025 once official sources confirm whether ≥2 Ariane 6 liftoffs occurred in the defined UTC window.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40661, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763402744.482244, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.4 ], "centers": [ 0.605 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.75 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763402744.482244, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.4 ], "centers": [ 0.605 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.75 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.395, 0.605 ], "means": [ 0.5616511627906977 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 5.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 10.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 7.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 7.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 9.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 86, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-10-01:\n- Ariane 6 is Europe’s current heavy-lift expendable launch system, operated by Arianespace and launched from ELA-4 at the Guiana Space Centre. It has two main configurations: Ariane 62 (two P120C solid boosters) and Ariane 64 (four boosters). The VAxxx flight numbering is used for Ariane missions. ESA’s Ariane page also recaps recent Ariane 6 launches and timing.\n- Confirmed 2025 launches to date:\n • VA263 (Ariane 62): First commercial flight launched the CSO-3 Earth observation satellite on March 6, 2025 at 16:24 UTC; the mission was successful.\n • VA264 (Ariane 62): Launched EUMETSAT’s Metop‑SG‑A1 (carrying the Copernicus Sentinel‑5 instrument) on August 12, 2025 at 21:37 local time in Kourou (00:37 UTC on August 13); the mission was successful.\n- Planned cadence in 2025: Arianespace stated a target of five Ariane 6 flights in 2025, primarily in the second half of the year.\n- Near-term outlook (late 2025): ESA indicates the Sentinel‑1D mission (VA265) on Ariane 6 is expected no earlier than the beginning of November 2025 at Europe’s Spaceport in Kourou, with exact date/time to be confirmed. ESA further confirms Sentinel‑1D arrived in French Guiana and that the launch campaign is underway for liftoff on Ariane 6 at the end of 2025.\n\nWhy this question has non-trivial uncertainty:\n- At least one late‑2025 Ariane 6 launch (Sentinel‑1D) is expected, but whether a second Ariane 6 launch will also occur between Oct 15 and year‑end depends on vehicle readiness, range availability, payload readiness (e.g., institutional or commercial missions), and production ramp‑up, all of which have seen changes in 2025 and remain subject to schedule risk.\n\nDefinitions and scope:\n- “Ariane 6” means any launch of the Ariane 6 family (Ariane 62 or Ariane 64). See background on variants and capabilities.\n- “Launch”/“liftoff” means the moment the rocket physically leaves the launch pad under its own power; pre‑launch operations, countdowns, or scrubs without liftoff do not count. Abort after liftoff still counts as a launch. The liftoff timestamp used for resolution is the official time reported by Arianespace or ESA.\n- “Between 00:00:00 UTC on Oct 15, 2025 and 23:59:59 UTC on Dec 31, 2025” is inclusive of both endpoints (UTC).\n- “At least two” means two or more distinct Ariane 6 liftoffs within the defined time window. Any mission designations (e.g., VAxxx) qualify if they are Ariane 6 flights.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"8ca1c0a4ba9dee16\"}}`" }, { "id": 40660, "title": "Between Oct 15 and Dec 31, 2025, will the 119th U.S. Congress pass a bill that reauthorizes the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act (FVPSA)?", "short_title": "Between Oct 15 and Dec 31, 2025, will the 119th U.S. Congress pass a bill that reauthorizes the Fami", "url_title": "Between Oct 15 and Dec 31, 2025, will the 119th U.S. Congress pass a bill that reauthorizes the Fami", "slug": "between-oct-15-and-dec-31-2025-will-the-119th-us-congress-pass-a-bill-that-reauthorizes-the-fami", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:15.960002Z", "published_at": "2025-11-17T09:01:18Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-17T10:32:00.388236Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:16.304586Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-17T10:31:18Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-17T10:31:18Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-17T09:01:18Z", "nr_forecasters": 87, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40256, "title": "Between Oct 15 and Dec 31, 2025, will the 119th U.S. Congress pass a bill that reauthorizes the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act (FVPSA)?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:15.960416Z", "open_time": "2025-11-17T09:01:18Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-17T10:31:18Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-17T10:31:18Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-17T10:31:18Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-17T10:31:18Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "What this asks, in plain terms: Will Congress, between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31, complete passage in both chambers (House and Senate) of any bill (H.R. or S.) that renews the statutory authorization of appropriations for FVPSA programs beyond FY2025?\n\nKey context as of 2025-10-01:\n- FVPSA is federal domestic-violence legislation codified at 42 U.S.C. Chapter 110 (sections 10401–10421). It includes, among other provisions, §10413 authorizing the national domestic violence hotline grant.\n- The Office of Family Violence Prevention and Services (OFVPS) within HHS/ACF administers FVPSA funding for state, tribal, and coalition grants, technical assistance, specialized services, and national toll‑free hotlines for adult and youth victims of domestic violence.\n- In the U.S. legislative process, an authorization (such as FVPSA reauthorization) provides legal authority for a program and may include “authorization of appropriations” for specified years; appropriations are separate laws that provide the actual funding. Reauthorization renews or extends an authorization that would otherwise expire or be considered “unauthorized” for appropriations purposes.\n- The 119th United States Congress began on 2025-01-03 and runs until 2027-01-03; it is the current Congress as of 2025-10-01.\n- Indicator legislation in the 119th Congress: Congress.gov lists measures to amend FVPSA, such as H.R. 4510 (Healing Partnerships for Survivors Act) in the House and S. 2348 in the Senate, each described as amending the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act to authorize certain grants. (These example bills are cited to illustrate active legislative interest; their progress does not by itself determine the resolution.)\n\nData source and how passage is identified:\n- Congress.gov is the authoritative tracker for federal legislation, recording when a measure is “Passed/agreed to in House,” “Passed/agreed to in Senate,” and when a measure becomes an “enrolled measure” presented to the President—each indicating distinct stages in bicameral passage. An “enrolled measure” is the final official copy passed in identical form by both chambers.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"0a7595d7adbdedbe\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Eligible time window and time zone:\n- Start: 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC.\n- End: 2025-12-31 23:59:59 Eastern Time (UTC−05:00).\n- For timing, the event time is defined as the timestamp/date of the second chamber’s final passage of the qualifying bill (i.e., when both chambers have passed it). If that second-chamber passage occurs within the window, the question resolves Yes; otherwise No.\n\nWhat counts as a qualifying “FVPSA reauthorization bill” for this question:\n- FVPSA is defined as 42 U.S.C. Chapter 110 (sections 10401–10421).\n- For this market, a bill “reauthorizes FVPSA” if the bill’s enrolled text amends 42 U.S.C. §10403 (Authorization of appropriations) or otherwise adds/updates an authorization-of-appropriations provision within Chapter 110 to authorize appropriations for any FVPSA program for at least one fiscal year beginning after 2025-09-30 (i.e., FY2026 or later).\n- Appropriations-only measures (that do not amend Chapter 110 authorization-of-appropriations language) do not count as reauthorization. Technical or conforming-only amendments that merely update cross-references without adding or extending an authorization-of-appropriations year beyond FY2025 do not count.\n\nWhat “pass in both chambers” means (how to verify):\n- Resolve Yes if, by the End time, Congress.gov shows the qualifying bill has passed both chambers. This can be verified by either:\n 1) Congress.gov’s tracker showing the measure as “Passed/agreed to in House” and “Passed/agreed to in Senate,” with the second of these occurring within the window; or\n 2) The bill having reached the “enrolled measure”/“presented to the President” stage by the End time (both of which require passage in identical form by both chambers).\n- Presidential signature is NOT required for this question to resolve Yes.\n\nCounting rules and edge cases:\n- Instrument type: Only bills (designated H.R. or S.) qualify. Joint/Concurrent/Simple resolutions do not qualify, even if related.\n- Multiple bills: If more than one qualifying bill passes both chambers within the window, the market resolves Yes (first suffices). If the House and Senate pass different FVPSA-related bills without reconciling them into identical text, resolve No.\n- Evidence standard: Use the Congress.gov page for the bill as the primary resolution source. Check the “Tracker” and “All Actions” tabs to confirm dates/times of the relevant passage events and whether the enrolled text meets the reauthorization definition above.\n\nNon-exhaustive examples of potentially relevant measures (for context only):\n- House: H.R. 4510 (Healing Partnerships for Survivors Act) – described by Congress.gov as amending FVPSA.\n- Senate: S. 2348 – described by Congress.gov as amending FVPSA.\n(These examples are not pre-judgments; only bills that meet the reauthorization and passage criteria within the window will count.)", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40660, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763374692.014235, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.13 ], "centers": [ 0.17 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.25 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763374692.014235, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.13 ], "centers": [ 0.17 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.83, 0.17 ], "means": [ 0.20227586206896556 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 3.0, 4.0, 0.0, 7.0, 0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 2.0, 17.0, 1.0, 2.0, 2.0, 0.0, 8.0, 0.0, 2.0, 3.0, 0.0, 12.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 90, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "What this asks, in plain terms: Will Congress, between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31, complete passage in both chambers (House and Senate) of any bill (H.R. or S.) that renews the statutory authorization of appropriations for FVPSA programs beyond FY2025?\n\nKey context as of 2025-10-01:\n- FVPSA is federal domestic-violence legislation codified at 42 U.S.C. Chapter 110 (sections 10401–10421). It includes, among other provisions, §10413 authorizing the national domestic violence hotline grant.\n- The Office of Family Violence Prevention and Services (OFVPS) within HHS/ACF administers FVPSA funding for state, tribal, and coalition grants, technical assistance, specialized services, and national toll‑free hotlines for adult and youth victims of domestic violence.\n- In the U.S. legislative process, an authorization (such as FVPSA reauthorization) provides legal authority for a program and may include “authorization of appropriations” for specified years; appropriations are separate laws that provide the actual funding. Reauthorization renews or extends an authorization that would otherwise expire or be considered “unauthorized” for appropriations purposes.\n- The 119th United States Congress began on 2025-01-03 and runs until 2027-01-03; it is the current Congress as of 2025-10-01.\n- Indicator legislation in the 119th Congress: Congress.gov lists measures to amend FVPSA, such as H.R. 4510 (Healing Partnerships for Survivors Act) in the House and S. 2348 in the Senate, each described as amending the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act to authorize certain grants. (These example bills are cited to illustrate active legislative interest; their progress does not by itself determine the resolution.)\n\nData source and how passage is identified:\n- Congress.gov is the authoritative tracker for federal legislation, recording when a measure is “Passed/agreed to in House,” “Passed/agreed to in Senate,” and when a measure becomes an “enrolled measure” presented to the President—each indicating distinct stages in bicameral passage. An “enrolled measure” is the final official copy passed in identical form by both chambers.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"0a7595d7adbdedbe\"}}`" }, { "id": 40659, "title": "By 23:59 PKT on December 31, 2025, will an official source report at least 11,000,000 girls aged 9–14 vaccinated against HPV in Pakistan’s September 2025 Phase‑1 campaign areas?", "short_title": "By 23:59 PKT on December 31, 2025, will an official source report at least 11,000,000 girls aged 9–1", "url_title": "By 23:59 PKT on December 31, 2025, will an official source report at least 11,000,000 girls aged 9–1", "slug": "by-2359-pkt-on-december-31-2025-will-an-official-source-report-at-least-11000000-girls-aged-91", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:15.423956Z", "published_at": "2025-11-15T04:56:03Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T06:27:00.304657Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:15Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T06:26:03Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T06:26:03Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-15T04:56:03Z", "nr_forecasters": 0, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40255, "title": "By 23:59 PKT on December 31, 2025, will an official source report at least 11,000,000 girls aged 9–14 vaccinated against HPV in Pakistan’s September 2025 Phase‑1 campaign areas?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:15.424363Z", "open_time": "2025-11-15T04:56:03Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T06:26:03Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T06:26:03Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T06:26:03Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T06:26:03Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Status quo as of 2025‑09‑30\r\n- Pakistan’s first HPV vaccination campaign (Phase‑1) ran September 15–27, 2025 across Punjab, Sindh, Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK), and Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT), delivered via schools, madrassas, and health facilities. The stated target population in Phase‑1 is about 13 million girls aged 9–14, with a goal to vaccinate at least 90% of these eligible girls during this campaign [551f2c, f08c3]. Pakistan’s campaign uses the Cecolin HPV vaccine on a single‑dose schedule, per national reporting and guidance materials.\r\n- Short official extensions were announced: Punjab extended its campaign by three days to maximize coverage; Sindh extended to October 1, 2025.\r\n- Early tallies were mixed: on September 26, 2025, the Health Minister said about 9 million adolescent girls had been vaccinated during the campaign. Other reporting suggested that by the end of the campaign “only around half” of an intended 11 million doses were administered, citing unnamed officials; this implies roughly 5.5 million, though that claim conflicts with the minister’s 9 million figure and lacks a named source.\r\n\r\nWhy this is forecastable\r\n- The Phase‑1 target (≈13 million), ambitious coverage goal (≥90%), high early count (≈9 million) alongside reports of resistance and logistical challenges create uncertainty about where the final official Phase‑1 tally will land by year‑end [551f2c, f08c3, 3a641a, 562591].\r\n\r\nKey context and definitions referenced in the criteria below\r\n- “Phase‑1 campaign areas” are Punjab, Sindh, AJK, and ICT, as defined by the Government of Pakistan and partners for the September 2025 campaign [a606c3, 551f2c, f08c3].\r\n- Campaign window: September 15–27, 2025, with some officially announced extensions in specific jurisdictions (e.g., Punjab +3 days; Sindh to October 1).\r\n- HPV vaccine and vaccination: Pakistan’s campaign uses Cecolin in a single‑dose schedule; for this question, “vaccinated” refers to unique girls who received at least one HPV vaccine dose as counted by the authorities’ Phase‑1 reporting.\r\n\r\nHelpful links (for definitions and likely publication locations)\r\n- Federal Directorate of Immunization / EPI Pakistan campaign page: https://www.epi.gov.pk/hpv-vaccination-campaign-15-27-september-2025/ \r\n- WHO EMRO Pakistan news: https://www.emro.who.int/pak/pakistan-news/ \r\n- Gavi media room: https://www.gavi.org/news-resources/media-room/news-releases [f08c3]\r\n- Background reporting on early tallies: AP (Sep 26, 2025) ; Dawn backgrounder (single‑dose, vaccine brand) ; Dawn report on resistance.\r\n\r\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"c0e9afa4f171bf81\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Question\r\n- Resolve Yes if, on or before 23:59 Pakistan Standard Time (PKT, UTC+05:00) on December 31, 2025, a qualifying official source publishes a cumulative total for Pakistan’s September 2025 HPV Phase‑1 campaign (covering Punjab, Sindh, AJK, and ICT) indicating at least 11,000,000 girls aged 9–14 vaccinated.\r\n- Resolve No if no qualifying source publishes such a total by the deadline, or if all qualifying published totals are below 11,000,000.\r\n\r\nDefinitions (for this question)\r\n- Phase‑1 campaign: The one‑time September 2025 national HPV vaccination campaign conducted in Punjab, Sindh, AJK, and ICT, officially described as running September 15–27, 2025, with certain jurisdictions announcing short extensions for mop‑up (e.g., Punjab +3 days; Sindh to October 1).\r\n- Phase‑1 campaign areas: Punjab, Sindh, AJK, ICT [a606c3, 551f2c, f08c3].\r\n- HPV vaccine: The human papillomavirus vaccine used in Pakistan’s campaign (reported as Cecolin), administered on a single‑dose schedule per national materials.\r\n- Vaccinated (for counting): A unique individual girl within the 9–14 age band whom the official Phase‑1 reporting counts as having received at least one HPV vaccine dose during Phase‑1 operations (including any officially announced Phase‑1 mop‑up extensions) in the defined regions. This question relies on the program’s own aggregation and does not attempt to re‑tabulate from sub‑counts [a606c3, 551f2c, f08c3, 44c9f6].\r\n- Girls aged 9–14: The age category as applied by the Pakistani immunization program in its official Phase‑1 campaign reporting; we accept the program’s own age determination as reflected in the published cumulative total.\r\n- Publication window: For the purposes of this market, only publications dated on or after 00:00 PKT on October 15, 2025 and on or before 23:59 PKT on December 31, 2025 will count toward resolution. If an eligible total was published before October 15, 2025, it will not count unless republished or updated within the publication window.\r\n\r\nQualifying sources (and precedence)\r\n- Primary: Pakistan’s Federal Directorate of Immunization (FDI) / Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) official website or press releases (including the campaign page).\r\n- Secondary (if no FDI/EPI total is available): WHO Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office (EMRO) newsroom for Pakistan , UNICEF Pakistan press releases, or Gavi media room [f08c3].\r\n- Tertiary (only if none of the above are available): Reputable Pakistani outlets directly quoting a named, responsible official giving the national Phase‑1 cumulative total for vaccinated girls (e.g., APP, Dawn). If multiple qualifying sources conflict, use the following precedence: FDI/EPI (highest) > WHO EMRO/UNICEF/Gavi > reputable Pakistani media quoting named officials.\r\n\r\nCounting and interpretation rules\r\n- The figure must be an official cumulative total for the September 2025 Phase‑1 campaign across the four Phase‑1 areas. Totals that clearly include other regions (e.g., future phases) or routine immunization beyond Phase‑1 should not be used.\r\n- Numeric interpretation: Evaluate the integer as stated. If a range is provided, use the lower bound. If the publication expresses “about/approximately X,” treat X as the value for threshold comparison. If multiple qualifying publications at the same precedence level give different numbers, use the latest published before the deadline.\r\n- Corrections/retractions: If a qualifying source issues a correction or retraction before the deadline, use the corrected figure; corrections after the deadline are ignored for resolution.\r\n- Language: Publications in English or Urdu are acceptable as long as the cumulative total is clear.\r\n\r\nTiming and timezone\r\n- Deadline: 23:59 PKT (UTC+05:00) on December 31, 2025.\r\n- The question opens no earlier than October 15, 2025 (00:00 PKT) for purposes of counting publications toward resolution.\r\n\r\nNotes for forecasters\r\n- Context to consider includes the official target population (~13 million) and ≥90% coverage ambition [551f2c, f08c3], mixed early tallies (minister’s claim of ~9 million vaccinated by Sep 26, 2025 versus lower figures cited anonymously in subsequent reporting ), and officially announced short extensions in Punjab and Sindh. These factors may affect the final Phase‑1 cumulative total that authorities or partners publish by year‑end.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40659, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [], "latest": null, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 0, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Status quo as of 2025‑09‑30\r\n- Pakistan’s first HPV vaccination campaign (Phase‑1) ran September 15–27, 2025 across Punjab, Sindh, Azad Jammu & Kashmir (AJK), and Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT), delivered via schools, madrassas, and health facilities. The stated target population in Phase‑1 is about 13 million girls aged 9–14, with a goal to vaccinate at least 90% of these eligible girls during this campaign [551f2c, f08c3]. Pakistan’s campaign uses the Cecolin HPV vaccine on a single‑dose schedule, per national reporting and guidance materials.\r\n- Short official extensions were announced: Punjab extended its campaign by three days to maximize coverage; Sindh extended to October 1, 2025.\r\n- Early tallies were mixed: on September 26, 2025, the Health Minister said about 9 million adolescent girls had been vaccinated during the campaign. Other reporting suggested that by the end of the campaign “only around half” of an intended 11 million doses were administered, citing unnamed officials; this implies roughly 5.5 million, though that claim conflicts with the minister’s 9 million figure and lacks a named source.\r\n\r\nWhy this is forecastable\r\n- The Phase‑1 target (≈13 million), ambitious coverage goal (≥90%), high early count (≈9 million) alongside reports of resistance and logistical challenges create uncertainty about where the final official Phase‑1 tally will land by year‑end [551f2c, f08c3, 3a641a, 562591].\r\n\r\nKey context and definitions referenced in the criteria below\r\n- “Phase‑1 campaign areas” are Punjab, Sindh, AJK, and ICT, as defined by the Government of Pakistan and partners for the September 2025 campaign [a606c3, 551f2c, f08c3].\r\n- Campaign window: September 15–27, 2025, with some officially announced extensions in specific jurisdictions (e.g., Punjab +3 days; Sindh to October 1).\r\n- HPV vaccine and vaccination: Pakistan’s campaign uses Cecolin in a single‑dose schedule; for this question, “vaccinated” refers to unique girls who received at least one HPV vaccine dose as counted by the authorities’ Phase‑1 reporting.\r\n\r\nHelpful links (for definitions and likely publication locations)\r\n- Federal Directorate of Immunization / EPI Pakistan campaign page: https://www.epi.gov.pk/hpv-vaccination-campaign-15-27-september-2025/ \r\n- WHO EMRO Pakistan news: https://www.emro.who.int/pak/pakistan-news/ \r\n- Gavi media room: https://www.gavi.org/news-resources/media-room/news-releases [f08c3]\r\n- Background reporting on early tallies: AP (Sep 26, 2025) ; Dawn backgrounder (single‑dose, vaccine brand) ; Dawn report on resistance.\r\n\r\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"c0e9afa4f171bf81\"}}`" }, { "id": 40658, "title": "Will Mikie Sherrill be officially certified as the winner of New Jersey’s 2025 gubernatorial election by December 31, 2025?", "short_title": "Will Mikie Sherrill be officially certified as the winner of New Jersey’s 2025 gubernatorial electio", "url_title": "Will Mikie Sherrill be officially certified as the winner of New Jersey’s 2025 gubernatorial electio", "slug": "will-mikie-sherrill-be-officially-certified-as-the-winner-of-new-jerseys-2025-gubernatorial-electio", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:14.984412Z", "published_at": "2025-11-15T21:15:54Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T22:46:00.354238Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:15.186362Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T22:45:54Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T22:45:54Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-15T21:15:54Z", "nr_forecasters": 87, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40254, "title": "Will Mikie Sherrill be officially certified as the winner of New Jersey’s 2025 gubernatorial election by December 31, 2025?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:14.984805Z", "open_time": "2025-11-15T21:15:54Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T22:45:54Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T22:45:54Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T22:45:54Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T22:45:54Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-09-30: The New Jersey gubernatorial general election is scheduled for November 4, 2025, with Democrat Mikie Sherrill facing Republican Jack Ciattarelli. Incumbent Gov. Phil Murphy (D) is term-limited and not running. Race handicappers currently rate the contest as Lean Democratic (e.g., Cook Political Report). Public polling suggests a competitive race: a Quinnipiac University poll of likely voters released September 17 shows Sherrill 49% to Ciattarelli 41% (±3.9 pp) ; some recent polling has shown a statistical tie and mixed toplines, reflected in major polling trackers.\n\nResolution process context: New Jersey certifies election results via a statutory canvass. For the 2025 General Election, county boards of canvassers meet November 19, county clerks transmit official results to the Secretary of State by November 24, and the Board of State Canvassers must meet to certify statewide results (including Governor) on or before December 4, 2025. The New Jersey Department of State’s Division of Elections maintains the central “Election Results” portal and posts county reports and statewide information; it also explains that running tallies on election night are published by counties and that the state posts periodic reports and final certifications as available. As an additional authoritative reporting source, the Associated Press (AP) collects results directly from local officials and calls races only when confident the leader cannot be overtaken; AP provides comprehensive election coverage and race calls.\n\nWhy this question is non-trivial: New Jersey is generally Democratic-leaning, but historical and current dynamics make this contest uncertain. Ratings are Lean D rather than Safe, and polling varies from mid-single-digit Sherrill leads to ties, suggesting a plausible range of outcomes. Forecasters may weigh turnout, registration advantages, late-campaign dynamics, national environment, regional shifts, and issue salience (e.g., affordability/property taxes).\n\nKey definitions for clarity:\n- \"New Jersey gubernatorial election\" refers to the statewide election for Governor of New Jersey held November 4, 2025.\n- \"Winner\" means the candidate certified by New Jersey’s Board of State Canvassers as elected Governor in the official statewide canvass for the 2025 general election.\n- \"Certified results\" means the official statewide canvass certification issued by the Board of State Canvassers (per N.J.S.A. 19:21-1) and published/accessible via the New Jersey Division of Elections’ official websites or documents.\n- \"Associated Press race call\" means AP’s formal declaration of a winner based on its vote collection and Decision Team methodology, as described in AP’s role in elections materials.\n- Dates/times are in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).\n\nUseful official sources:\n- New Jersey Division of Elections – Election Results portal.\n- 2025 General Election timeline specifying certification deadlines.\n- Race context and rating (Cook Political Report).\n- Polling references and trackers.\n- AP elections methodology and coverage.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"c6367390e4356be3\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Start date and window: Consider events occurring between 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\nPrimary resolution source: Resolve \"Yes\" if, on or before 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC, the New Jersey Board of State Canvassers’ certified statewide results for the 2025 general election list Mikie Sherrill as the elected Governor of New Jersey. Resolve \"No\" if the certified statewide results list any other candidate as the elected Governor. The certification should be accessible via the New Jersey Division of Elections’ official Election Results website or official postings/documents (e.g., statewide canvass/certification).\n\nFallback resolution (only if the primary source is not available by the deadline): If, by 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC, the statewide certification has not been published or is not accessible, resolve based on an Associated Press (AP) formal race call for the New Jersey Governor, as published in AP’s election coverage. Resolve \"Yes\" if AP has called the race for Mikie Sherrill; otherwise resolve \"No\".\n\nClarifications:\n- \"Certified statewide results\" refers specifically to the Board of State Canvassers’ certification of the general election, which by statute must occur on or before the 30th day after the election (December 4, 2025), barring extraordinary delays.\n- County-level reports or unofficial periodic reports do not constitute certification unless explicitly incorporated in the statewide canvass; they may be posted on the Division of Elections site but are not used for primary resolution.\n- If multiple versions of certification exist, use the latest certification available by the deadline.\n- If litigation or contest petitions occur after certification, resolution remains based on the certification status as of 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\nVerification: A resolver should be able to confirm the outcome within ~10 minutes by locating the statewide certification (or, if necessary, AP’s race call page) via the NJ Division of Elections’ Election Results portal or AP’s elections coverage.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40658, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763246743.768062, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.95 ], "centers": [ 0.97 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.99 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763246743.768062, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.95 ], "centers": [ 0.97 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.99 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.030000000000000027, 0.97 ], "means": [ 0.9260842911877395 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 19.0, 4.0, 4.0, 9.0, 31.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 91, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-09-30: The New Jersey gubernatorial general election is scheduled for November 4, 2025, with Democrat Mikie Sherrill facing Republican Jack Ciattarelli. Incumbent Gov. Phil Murphy (D) is term-limited and not running. Race handicappers currently rate the contest as Lean Democratic (e.g., Cook Political Report). Public polling suggests a competitive race: a Quinnipiac University poll of likely voters released September 17 shows Sherrill 49% to Ciattarelli 41% (±3.9 pp) ; some recent polling has shown a statistical tie and mixed toplines, reflected in major polling trackers.\n\nResolution process context: New Jersey certifies election results via a statutory canvass. For the 2025 General Election, county boards of canvassers meet November 19, county clerks transmit official results to the Secretary of State by November 24, and the Board of State Canvassers must meet to certify statewide results (including Governor) on or before December 4, 2025. The New Jersey Department of State’s Division of Elections maintains the central “Election Results” portal and posts county reports and statewide information; it also explains that running tallies on election night are published by counties and that the state posts periodic reports and final certifications as available. As an additional authoritative reporting source, the Associated Press (AP) collects results directly from local officials and calls races only when confident the leader cannot be overtaken; AP provides comprehensive election coverage and race calls.\n\nWhy this question is non-trivial: New Jersey is generally Democratic-leaning, but historical and current dynamics make this contest uncertain. Ratings are Lean D rather than Safe, and polling varies from mid-single-digit Sherrill leads to ties, suggesting a plausible range of outcomes. Forecasters may weigh turnout, registration advantages, late-campaign dynamics, national environment, regional shifts, and issue salience (e.g., affordability/property taxes).\n\nKey definitions for clarity:\n- \"New Jersey gubernatorial election\" refers to the statewide election for Governor of New Jersey held November 4, 2025.\n- \"Winner\" means the candidate certified by New Jersey’s Board of State Canvassers as elected Governor in the official statewide canvass for the 2025 general election.\n- \"Certified results\" means the official statewide canvass certification issued by the Board of State Canvassers (per N.J.S.A. 19:21-1) and published/accessible via the New Jersey Division of Elections’ official websites or documents.\n- \"Associated Press race call\" means AP’s formal declaration of a winner based on its vote collection and Decision Team methodology, as described in AP’s role in elections materials.\n- Dates/times are in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).\n\nUseful official sources:\n- New Jersey Division of Elections – Election Results portal.\n- 2025 General Election timeline specifying certification deadlines.\n- Race context and rating (Cook Political Report).\n- Polling references and trackers.\n- AP elections methodology and coverage.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"c6367390e4356be3\"}}`" }, { "id": 40657, "title": "Will the European Commission adopt at least one fining non-compliance decision under the Digital Services Act against a designated VLOP/VLOSE between Oct 15, 2024 and Dec 31, 2025 (UTC)?", "short_title": "Will the European Commission adopt at least one fining non-compliance decision under the Digital Ser", "url_title": "Will the European Commission adopt at least one fining non-compliance decision under the Digital Ser", "slug": "will-the-european-commission-adopt-at-least-one-fining-non-compliance-decision-under-the-digital-ser", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:14.309431Z", "published_at": "2025-11-15T20:17:40Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T21:48:00.275985Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:14.697225Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T21:47:40Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T21:47:40Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-15T20:17:40Z", "nr_forecasters": 87, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40253, "title": "Will the European Commission adopt at least one fining non-compliance decision under the Digital Services Act against a designated VLOP/VLOSE between Oct 15, 2024 and Dec 31, 2025 (UTC)?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:14.309845Z", "open_time": "2025-11-15T20:17:40Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T21:47:40Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T21:47:40Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T21:47:40Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T21:47:40Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Context as of 2025-09-30:\n- Enforcement powers under the Digital Services Act (DSA): Since 17 February 2024, the European Commission (\"the Commission\") can adopt non-compliance decisions imposing administrative fines of up to 6% of a provider’s worldwide annual turnover for breaches of DSA obligations. It can also impose periodic penalty payments of up to 5% of average daily worldwide turnover for delays in complying with remedies, interim measures, or commitments. Separate procedural fines (up to 1%) exist for failures such as providing incorrect or misleading information or refusing inspections.\n- Who is supervised directly by the Commission: Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) and Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs) are defined as services with average monthly active recipients reaching or exceeding 10% of the EU population (i.e., at least 45 million users). The Commission directly supervises and enforces DSA obligations for designated VLOPs/VLOSEs. The Commission maintains a live overview of designated services and its enforcement activities on its “Supervision of the designated VLOPs and VLOSEs” page (updated periodically; page notes include updates through September 2025).\n- Investigations and preliminary steps to date: The Commission has opened proceedings and issued preliminary findings in several cases concerning designated services. For example, on 15 May 2025 the Commission informed TikTok of its preliminary view that TikTok’s ad repository breached DSA obligations. Such preliminary findings are without prejudice to the outcome and can, after further procedure, lead to non‑compliance decisions that may impose fines.\n\nWhy this question is forecastable now: As of the date above, the Commission has active investigations and preliminary findings against multiple designated services, the sanctioning framework is in force, and it is plausible that at least one case could culminate in a fining non‑compliance decision by year‑end 2025. At the same time, procedural timelines, rights of defense, and possible commitments can delay or avert fines, creating non‑trivial uncertainty.\n\nKey definitions and links for forecasters:\n- Digital Services Act (DSA): EU Regulation establishing obligations for intermediary services and enhanced supervision/enforcement for the largest platforms and search engines. See Commission overview of enforcement powers and timelines.\n- Very Large Online Platform (VLOP) / Very Large Online Search Engine (VLOSE): Services with average monthly active recipients in the EU ≥ 45 million (≈10% of EU population). Designation triggers additional obligations and Commission supervision. The current list of designated services is maintained here: “Supervision of the designated VLOPs and VLOSEs”.\n- Non-compliance decision imposing a fine (\"fining non-compliance decision\"): A formal Commission decision that definitively establishes a breach of DSA obligations and imposes an administrative fine (up to 6% of worldwide annual turnover) and may order corrective measures and enhanced supervision. This is distinct from procedural fines (e.g., for incomplete replies) and from periodic penalty payments.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"4cd587b550442115\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Question: Resolve \"Yes\" if, between 2024-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC inclusive, the European Commission publicly adopts at least one non-compliance decision under the DSA that (a) definitively establishes a breach of the DSA by a provider of a designated VLOP or VLOSE, and (b) imposes an administrative fine (“fining non-compliance decision”). Resolve \"No\" otherwise.\n\nDefinitions and inclusions/exclusions:\n- \"Designated VLOP/VLOSE\": A service that appears as designated on the Commission’s live supervision page at the time of the decision. The provider can be any legal entity responsible for that designated service.\n- \"Fining non-compliance decision\": A Commission decision establishing a breach of DSA obligations and imposing an administrative fine (up to 6% of the provider’s worldwide annual turnover). Decisions solely imposing periodic penalty payments, interim measures, commitments without fines, or procedural fines (e.g., for incorrect/misleading information or refusal to cooperate) do not count.\n- \"Publicly adopts\": The decision is announced via a Commission press release/news item (e.g., Commission Press Corner or the Digital Strategy enforcement news) and/or the decision text is published on an official Commission website. The decision’s adoption date reported by the Commission determines whether it falls inside the time window.\n\nSources of truth for resolution (any one is sufficient):\n- Commission press releases/news or enforcement pages announcing the adoption of a non‑compliance decision imposing a fine under the DSA against a designated VLOP/VLOSE.\n- If needed for verification, the published decision text on an official Commission website.\n\nEdge cases:\n- If multiple decisions are adopted the same day, only one is needed for \"Yes\".\n- If a decision is adopted in the window but published later, use the Commission-reported adoption date. If the adoption date cannot be verified from official Commission sources by 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC, resolve based on the publication/announcement date instead.\n- Appeals or subsequent judicial developments do not affect resolution once adoption is established.\n\nNotes for forecasters:\n- The Commission’s enforcement framework explains relevant procedures, timelines, and sanction types. The list of designated services and enforcement activity timeline are available on the supervision page. Recent preliminary findings (e.g., TikTok ad repository, May 2025) illustrate active cases that could progress to fining decisions within the forecast window.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40657, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763242386.930436, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "centers": [ 0.3 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.42 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763242386.930436, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "centers": [ 0.3 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.42 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.7, 0.3 ], "means": [ 0.36410344827586216 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 8.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 16.0, 1.0, 1.0, 3.0, 0.0, 9.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 8.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 7.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 7.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 90, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Context as of 2025-09-30:\n- Enforcement powers under the Digital Services Act (DSA): Since 17 February 2024, the European Commission (\"the Commission\") can adopt non-compliance decisions imposing administrative fines of up to 6% of a provider’s worldwide annual turnover for breaches of DSA obligations. It can also impose periodic penalty payments of up to 5% of average daily worldwide turnover for delays in complying with remedies, interim measures, or commitments. Separate procedural fines (up to 1%) exist for failures such as providing incorrect or misleading information or refusing inspections.\n- Who is supervised directly by the Commission: Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) and Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs) are defined as services with average monthly active recipients reaching or exceeding 10% of the EU population (i.e., at least 45 million users). The Commission directly supervises and enforces DSA obligations for designated VLOPs/VLOSEs. The Commission maintains a live overview of designated services and its enforcement activities on its “Supervision of the designated VLOPs and VLOSEs” page (updated periodically; page notes include updates through September 2025).\n- Investigations and preliminary steps to date: The Commission has opened proceedings and issued preliminary findings in several cases concerning designated services. For example, on 15 May 2025 the Commission informed TikTok of its preliminary view that TikTok’s ad repository breached DSA obligations. Such preliminary findings are without prejudice to the outcome and can, after further procedure, lead to non‑compliance decisions that may impose fines.\n\nWhy this question is forecastable now: As of the date above, the Commission has active investigations and preliminary findings against multiple designated services, the sanctioning framework is in force, and it is plausible that at least one case could culminate in a fining non‑compliance decision by year‑end 2025. At the same time, procedural timelines, rights of defense, and possible commitments can delay or avert fines, creating non‑trivial uncertainty.\n\nKey definitions and links for forecasters:\n- Digital Services Act (DSA): EU Regulation establishing obligations for intermediary services and enhanced supervision/enforcement for the largest platforms and search engines. See Commission overview of enforcement powers and timelines.\n- Very Large Online Platform (VLOP) / Very Large Online Search Engine (VLOSE): Services with average monthly active recipients in the EU ≥ 45 million (≈10% of EU population). Designation triggers additional obligations and Commission supervision. The current list of designated services is maintained here: “Supervision of the designated VLOPs and VLOSEs”.\n- Non-compliance decision imposing a fine (\"fining non-compliance decision\"): A formal Commission decision that definitively establishes a breach of DSA obligations and imposes an administrative fine (up to 6% of worldwide annual turnover) and may order corrective measures and enhanced supervision. This is distinct from procedural fines (e.g., for incomplete replies) and from periodic penalty payments.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"4cd587b550442115\"}}`" }, { "id": 40656, "title": "Between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC), will the IAEA publicly report Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U-235 at or below 396.8 kg (U mass)?", "short_title": "Between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC), will the IAEA publicly report Iran’s stockpile of uranium e", "url_title": "Between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC), will the IAEA publicly report Iran’s stockpile of uranium e", "slug": "between-2025-10-15-and-2025-12-31-utc-will-the-iaea-publicly-report-irans-stockpile-of-uranium-e", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:13.739548Z", "published_at": "2025-11-15T18:38:02Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T20:09:00.269437Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:14.048152Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T20:08:02Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T20:08:02Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-15T18:38:02Z", "nr_forecasters": 87, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40252, "title": "Between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC), will the IAEA publicly report Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U-235 at or below 396.8 kg (U mass)?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:13.739969Z", "open_time": "2025-11-15T18:38:02Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T20:08:02Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T20:08:02Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T20:08:02Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T20:08:02Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-10-01: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that as of 13 June 2025, Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U‑235 totaled 440.9 kg of uranium (U mass) in the form of UF6, an increase of 32.3 kg from the previous report. The same IAEA Director General report (GOV/2025/50, published 3 September 2025) describes major verification challenges since 13 June 2025, including the Agency’s loss of continuity of knowledge regarding inventories of nuclear material, withdrawal of inspectors for safety reasons, and Iran’s subsequent suspension of cooperation, leaving the IAEA unable to conduct in-field verification and unable to quantify changes to the stockpile with prior confidence. Contemporary news coverage also cited the 440.9 kg figure and contextualized it as a slight increase before the mid-June attacks on nuclear facilities, noting the IAEA as source. Definitions and terms: \n- Uranium enrichment: The process of increasing the concentration of uranium‑235 (U‑235) in uranium through isotope separation; enrichment percentage (e.g., 60%) refers to the fraction of U‑235 by mass in the uranium.\n- Uranium‑235 (U‑235): A fissile isotope of uranium with natural abundance ~0.72% in unprocessed uranium; enrichment increases its proportion.\n- Uranium hexafluoride (UF6): A volatile compound used in gaseous diffusion and gas centrifuge enrichment; IAEA reporting commonly distinguishes “kg of uranium (U mass)” contained in UF6 from total UF6 mass.\n- “U mass”: For this question, “U mass” means kilograms of uranium content, not kilograms of UF6. The baseline 440.9 kg is explicitly reported by the IAEA as kg of uranium (in the form of UF6) enriched up to 60% U‑235.\n- “Enriched up to 60% U‑235”: For this question, this category follows IAEA usage and refers to uranium material whose U‑235 assay is within the IAEA’s “up to 60%” inventory category, i.e., material at or near 60% U‑235 assay as reported by the IAEA.\nSource documents and cadence: The principal source is IAEA Director General reports to the Board of Governors (e.g., GOV/2025/50, derestricted and posted on iaea.org) and any IAEA Director General public statements on iaea.org that include quantitative stockpile figures. The September 3, 2025 GOV/2025/50 report is the latest public, authoritative stockpile figure as of this writing. Reuters and AP articles corroborate the same figure and provide context but are secondary sources.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"14e79f345123a81c\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Baseline and threshold: Baseline is 440.9 kg of uranium (U mass) enriched up to 60% U‑235, as of 13 June 2025, per IAEA GOV/2025/50. The threshold for resolution is 396.8 kg (i.e., a decrease of at least 10% relative to the baseline).\nEvent window and time zone: Eligible publications are those publicly posted between 2025‑10‑15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 UTC (UTC) on iaea.org.\nWhat counts as “IAEA publicly report”: Any of the following, provided they are publicly accessible on iaea.org:\n- A derestricted IAEA Director General report to the Board of Governors that includes a numerical figure for Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U‑235, expressed as kilograms of uranium (U mass), as of a stated date.\n- An official IAEA “Statement” or “News Center” item by the Director General that includes a numerical figure for Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U‑235, expressed as kilograms of uranium (U mass), as of a stated date.\nPrimary metric and units: The primary metric for resolution is the IAEA‑reported kilograms of uranium (U mass) in the “enriched up to 60% U‑235” category. If both U mass and UF6 mass are provided, U mass governs. Figures reported only in UF6 mass will not be converted and will not count toward resolution unless the document itself states the corresponding U mass for the 60% category.\nYes/No rules:\n- Resolve Yes if any eligible IAEA public document (as defined above) published within the event window explicitly reports the 60% stockpile at or below 396.8 kg (U mass) as of its stated measurement date.\n- Resolve No if, by the end of the event window, no eligible IAEA public document reports a numerical U mass figure at or below 396.8 kg for the 60% category, including the case where no quantitative update is published.\nDocument precedence and conflicts: If multiple eligible IAEA documents are published within the window, use the most recent publication time (UTC). If figures conflict, the most recently published eligible IAEA document supersedes earlier ones for resolution.\nExclusions: Media reports not posted on iaea.org (e.g., wire services citing confidential reports) do not count as “publicly reported” for resolution, though they informed the background.\nVerification steps: A resolver will visit iaea.org’s Document Library and News Center to locate any derestricted Director General reports or statements published in the event window and verify whether a numerical U mass figure for uranium enriched up to 60% U‑235 is at or below 396.8 kg.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40656, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763235915.155892, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.07 ], "centers": [ 0.1 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.15 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763235915.155892, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.07 ], "centers": [ 0.1 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.15 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.9, 0.1 ], "means": [ 0.14611111111111116 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 4.0, 4.0, 9.0, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0, 3.0, 10.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 1.0, 22.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 90, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-10-01: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that as of 13 June 2025, Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U‑235 totaled 440.9 kg of uranium (U mass) in the form of UF6, an increase of 32.3 kg from the previous report. The same IAEA Director General report (GOV/2025/50, published 3 September 2025) describes major verification challenges since 13 June 2025, including the Agency’s loss of continuity of knowledge regarding inventories of nuclear material, withdrawal of inspectors for safety reasons, and Iran’s subsequent suspension of cooperation, leaving the IAEA unable to conduct in-field verification and unable to quantify changes to the stockpile with prior confidence. Contemporary news coverage also cited the 440.9 kg figure and contextualized it as a slight increase before the mid-June attacks on nuclear facilities, noting the IAEA as source. Definitions and terms: \n- Uranium enrichment: The process of increasing the concentration of uranium‑235 (U‑235) in uranium through isotope separation; enrichment percentage (e.g., 60%) refers to the fraction of U‑235 by mass in the uranium.\n- Uranium‑235 (U‑235): A fissile isotope of uranium with natural abundance ~0.72% in unprocessed uranium; enrichment increases its proportion.\n- Uranium hexafluoride (UF6): A volatile compound used in gaseous diffusion and gas centrifuge enrichment; IAEA reporting commonly distinguishes “kg of uranium (U mass)” contained in UF6 from total UF6 mass.\n- “U mass”: For this question, “U mass” means kilograms of uranium content, not kilograms of UF6. The baseline 440.9 kg is explicitly reported by the IAEA as kg of uranium (in the form of UF6) enriched up to 60% U‑235.\n- “Enriched up to 60% U‑235”: For this question, this category follows IAEA usage and refers to uranium material whose U‑235 assay is within the IAEA’s “up to 60%” inventory category, i.e., material at or near 60% U‑235 assay as reported by the IAEA.\nSource documents and cadence: The principal source is IAEA Director General reports to the Board of Governors (e.g., GOV/2025/50, derestricted and posted on iaea.org) and any IAEA Director General public statements on iaea.org that include quantitative stockpile figures. The September 3, 2025 GOV/2025/50 report is the latest public, authoritative stockpile figure as of this writing. Reuters and AP articles corroborate the same figure and provide context but are secondary sources.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"14e79f345123a81c\"}}`" }, { "id": 40655, "title": "Between October 15 and December 31, 2025 (UTC), will UEFA remove at least one Israeli club from the 2025/26 UEFA Champions League, Europa League, or Europa Conference League due to a formal UEFA decision that explicitly targets Israel’s participation?", "short_title": "Between October 15 and December 31, 2025 (UTC), will UEFA remove at least one Israeli club from the", "url_title": "Between October 15 and December 31, 2025 (UTC), will UEFA remove at least one Israeli club from the", "slug": "between-october-15-and-december-31-2025-utc-will-uefa-remove-at-least-one-israeli-club-from-the", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:13.301571Z", "published_at": "2025-11-15T12:46:01Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T14:17:00.214521Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:13.518272Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T14:16:01Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T14:16:01Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-15T12:46:01Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40251, "title": "Between October 15 and December 31, 2025 (UTC), will UEFA remove at least one Israeli club from the 2025/26 UEFA Champions League, Europa League, or Europa Conference League due to a formal UEFA decision that explicitly targets Israel’s participation?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:13.301987Z", "open_time": "2025-11-15T12:46:01Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T14:16:01Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T14:16:01Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T14:16:01Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T14:16:01Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-09-30: Israeli clubs are participating in UEFA club competitions in the 2025/26 season. Maccabi Tel-Aviv appears on UEFA’s site as participating in the 2025/26 UEFA Champions League. Maccabi Haifa appears on UEFA’s site as participating in the 2025/26 UEFA Europa Conference League. Wikipedia’s 2025/26 Europa Conference League page lists Israeli club Beitar Jerusalem among qualifying round participants, and notes the league phase begins on October 2, 2025. The Israel Football Association (IFA) governs football in Israel and has been a member of UEFA since the early 1990s; Israeli clubs participate in UEFA competitions under IFA affiliation.\n\nPotential suspension context: Reporting indicates UEFA is moving toward a vote to suspend Israel, with a majority of UEFA’s 20-member Executive Committee expected to support any such vote. If adopted, the suspension would bar both Israeli national and club teams from participating in UEFA competitions. Separate reporting states a decision could come as early as the week of September 29, 2025, though UEFA says no meetings are scheduled until December 3; the situation is politically sensitive, with pressure to exclude Israel and opposition voiced by the U.S. government.\n\nWhy this matters for the forecast window: The 2025/26 UEFA club competitions’ league phases start in early October (e.g., the Europa Conference League league phase begins October 2, 2025 ). If UEFA adopts a suspension or exclusion targeting Israeli teams during the forecast window, it could result in one or more Israeli clubs being removed mid-competition.\n\nDefinitions and scope (with authoritative references for terms):\n- “UEFA club competitions” means the UEFA Champions League, UEFA Europa League, and UEFA Europa Conference League as organized by UEFA in the 2025/26 season. See general overviews: Champions League (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Champions_League) Europa League (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Europa_League) Europa Conference League (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Europa_Conference_League).\n- “Israeli club” means a professional association football club affiliated with the Israel Football Association (IFA); see IFA overview (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Football_Association).\n- “UEFA decision” means a formal, published decision by UEFA (e.g., by the UEFA Executive Committee, UEFA Emergency Panel, the UEFA Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body (CEDB), or Appeals Body) that is posted on UEFA’s official website (uefa.com) under news, decisions, or competition communications.\n- “Targets Israel’s participation” means the decision explicitly references Israel or Israeli teams as the subject of suspension/exclusion (e.g., suspension of the Israel Football Association from UEFA competitions; exclusion/suspension of Israeli clubs from UEFA competitions). Decisions about scheduling, venues, safety, or general regulations that do not explicitly suspend/exclude Israel or Israeli clubs do not qualify.\n- “Removed” means an Israeli club that was listed by UEFA.com as a participant in the 2025/26 UCL/UEL/UECL (e.g., in the league phase participants list or club page) is officially excluded/suspended or otherwise barred from playing further matches in that competition due to the above “UEFA decision,” with effect during the forecast window. UEFA may use terms such as “exclusion,” “expulsion,” or “suspension”; any of these outcomes count if the decision explicitly targets Israeli participation.\n\nCurrent participation examples for verification (non-exhaustive):\n- Maccabi Tel-Aviv club page at UEFA.com for UCL 2025/26.\n- Maccabi Haifa club page at UEFA.com for UECL 2025/26.\n- UECL 2025/26 overview (league phase start and qualifying participants).\n\nContext on possible decision timing and scope: AP reports a majority of UEFA’s 20-member Executive Committee is expected to support a vote to suspend Israel, which would bar national and club teams. The Guardian reports insiders believe a suspension vote has a strong chance, with timing possibly “as early as next week,” though UEFA has stated no meetings are scheduled until December 3. These create plausible uncertainty within the October–December window.\n\nStart and end times: All dates/times in this question are in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). The event window starts at 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and ends at 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"c534bbc196db3671\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "This question resolves to YES if, between 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC, at least one Israeli club initially listed as a participant in the 2025/26 UEFA Champions League, Europa League, or Europa Conference League is officially removed (excluded, suspended, expelled, or otherwise barred from playing further matches in that competition) as the direct result of a formal UEFA decision that explicitly targets Israel’s participation.\n\nPrimary resolution sources:\n- Official UEFA publications on uefa.com (e.g., UEFA Executive Committee decisions, Emergency Panel decisions, CEDB/Appeals Body decisions, official competition communications, and news posts). Verifiable via:\n - UEFA.com competition pages (e.g., club pages or league phase participants lists) showing the club’s removal or status change (example club pages: Maccabi Tel-Aviv UCL 2025/26 ; Maccabi Haifa UECL 2025/26 ).\n - UEFA.com news and media sections where decisions are published (e.g., https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/news/).\n\nSecondary resolution sources (if needed due to unavailability or ambiguity of UEFA.com publications):\n- Credible wire-service or major newspaper reporting explicitly confirming the UEFA decision and its effect on club participation, such as the Associated Press or The Guardian. Any secondary source must clearly state that UEFA has issued a decision suspending/excluding Israeli teams or the IFA and that this decision has resulted in the removal of at least one Israeli club from a listed UEFA club competition during the window.\n\nExclusions (do NOT count as removal for this question):\n- Sporting elimination due to match results.\n- Administrative or disciplinary exclusions unrelated to Israel’s participation (e.g., ineligible player, match-fixing, financial irregularities).\n- Postponements, relocation to neutral venues, or safety/security measures that do not suspend/exclude Israeli teams.\n- Voluntary withdrawal by the club or federation absent a qualifying UEFA decision.\n- Decisions that apply only to national teams and do not remove any club from a UEFA club competition in the window.\n- Announcements in the window whose effective date is after 2025-12-31 (i.e., the removal must take effect during the window).\n\nResolution procedure:\n1) Check UEFA.com’s official announcements and competition pages for any decisions in the window. Confirm that the text of the decision explicitly targets Israel or Israeli teams.\n2) Verify that an Israeli club (as defined) that was listed as a participant in the 2025/26 UCL/UEL/UECL is no longer eligible or listed, and/or is marked excluded/suspended in the competition during the window.\n3) If UEFA.com evidence is unavailable or unclear, corroborate using AP or The Guardian reporting.\n\nResolve YES if steps (1)–(3) confirm at least one qualifying removal occurred in the window. Resolve NO otherwise.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40655, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763216073.48183, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.2 ], "centers": [ 0.25 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.3 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763216073.48183, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.2 ], "centers": [ 0.25 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.3 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.75, 0.25 ], "means": [ 0.2656976744186045 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 9.0, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 0.0, 7.0, 2.0, 2.0, 1.0, 1.0, 14.0, 0.0, 2.0, 2.0, 1.0, 13.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 7.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 89, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-09-30: Israeli clubs are participating in UEFA club competitions in the 2025/26 season. Maccabi Tel-Aviv appears on UEFA’s site as participating in the 2025/26 UEFA Champions League. Maccabi Haifa appears on UEFA’s site as participating in the 2025/26 UEFA Europa Conference League. Wikipedia’s 2025/26 Europa Conference League page lists Israeli club Beitar Jerusalem among qualifying round participants, and notes the league phase begins on October 2, 2025. The Israel Football Association (IFA) governs football in Israel and has been a member of UEFA since the early 1990s; Israeli clubs participate in UEFA competitions under IFA affiliation.\n\nPotential suspension context: Reporting indicates UEFA is moving toward a vote to suspend Israel, with a majority of UEFA’s 20-member Executive Committee expected to support any such vote. If adopted, the suspension would bar both Israeli national and club teams from participating in UEFA competitions. Separate reporting states a decision could come as early as the week of September 29, 2025, though UEFA says no meetings are scheduled until December 3; the situation is politically sensitive, with pressure to exclude Israel and opposition voiced by the U.S. government.\n\nWhy this matters for the forecast window: The 2025/26 UEFA club competitions’ league phases start in early October (e.g., the Europa Conference League league phase begins October 2, 2025 ). If UEFA adopts a suspension or exclusion targeting Israeli teams during the forecast window, it could result in one or more Israeli clubs being removed mid-competition.\n\nDefinitions and scope (with authoritative references for terms):\n- “UEFA club competitions” means the UEFA Champions League, UEFA Europa League, and UEFA Europa Conference League as organized by UEFA in the 2025/26 season. See general overviews: Champions League (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Champions_League) Europa League (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Europa_League) Europa Conference League (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Europa_Conference_League).\n- “Israeli club” means a professional association football club affiliated with the Israel Football Association (IFA); see IFA overview (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Football_Association).\n- “UEFA decision” means a formal, published decision by UEFA (e.g., by the UEFA Executive Committee, UEFA Emergency Panel, the UEFA Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body (CEDB), or Appeals Body) that is posted on UEFA’s official website (uefa.com) under news, decisions, or competition communications.\n- “Targets Israel’s participation” means the decision explicitly references Israel or Israeli teams as the subject of suspension/exclusion (e.g., suspension of the Israel Football Association from UEFA competitions; exclusion/suspension of Israeli clubs from UEFA competitions). Decisions about scheduling, venues, safety, or general regulations that do not explicitly suspend/exclude Israel or Israeli clubs do not qualify.\n- “Removed” means an Israeli club that was listed by UEFA.com as a participant in the 2025/26 UCL/UEL/UECL (e.g., in the league phase participants list or club page) is officially excluded/suspended or otherwise barred from playing further matches in that competition due to the above “UEFA decision,” with effect during the forecast window. UEFA may use terms such as “exclusion,” “expulsion,” or “suspension”; any of these outcomes count if the decision explicitly targets Israeli participation.\n\nCurrent participation examples for verification (non-exhaustive):\n- Maccabi Tel-Aviv club page at UEFA.com for UCL 2025/26.\n- Maccabi Haifa club page at UEFA.com for UECL 2025/26.\n- UECL 2025/26 overview (league phase start and qualifying participants).\n\nContext on possible decision timing and scope: AP reports a majority of UEFA’s 20-member Executive Committee is expected to support a vote to suspend Israel, which would bar national and club teams. The Guardian reports insiders believe a suspension vote has a strong chance, with timing possibly “as early as next week,” though UEFA has stated no meetings are scheduled until December 3. These create plausible uncertainty within the October–December window.\n\nStart and end times: All dates/times in this question are in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). The event window starts at 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC and ends at 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"c534bbc196db3671\"}}`" }, { "id": 40654, "title": "Will the U.S. add the International Criminal Court (or any of its Rome Statute organs) to OFAC’s SDN List between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC)?", "short_title": "Will the U.S. add the International Criminal Court (or any of its Rome Statute organs) to OFAC’s SDN", "url_title": "Will the U.S. add the International Criminal Court (or any of its Rome Statute organs) to OFAC’s SDN", "slug": "will-the-us-add-the-international-criminal-court-or-any-of-its-rome-statute-organs-to-ofacs-sdn", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:12.906177Z", "published_at": "2025-11-15T02:35:24Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T04:06:00.322227Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:13.117315Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T04:05:24Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T04:05:24Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-15T02:35:24Z", "nr_forecasters": 87, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40250, "title": "Will the U.S. add the International Criminal Court (or any of its Rome Statute organs) to OFAC’s SDN List between 2025-10-15 and 2025-12-31 (UTC)?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:12.906589Z", "open_time": "2025-11-15T02:35:24Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T04:05:24Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T04:05:24Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T04:05:24Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T04:05:24Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Definition and scope of the target entity:\n- The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an intergovernmental organization and international tribunal seated in The Hague, Netherlands, established under the Rome Statute in 2002.\n- The Rome Statute defines the “organs of the Court” in Article 34 as: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre‑Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; and (d) The Registry. For this question, “organs of the Court” refers exactly to those four categories, and designations of any such organ as a distinct entity count for resolution.\n\nU.S. sanctions authority and program context (as of 2025-10-01):\n- On February 6, 2025, Executive Order (E.O.) 14203, “Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court,” declared a national emergency related to the ICC’s actions and created sanctions authorities targeting persons involved in ICC efforts to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute certain “protected persons.” The order defines “person” to include individuals and entities.\n- On July 1, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued the International Criminal Court‑Related Sanctions Regulations at 31 CFR part 528 to implement E.O. 14203.\n- OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) List contains the names of individuals and entities whose property and interests in property are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from dealing with them. This question operationalizes “entity‑wide sanctions” as the ICC (or any of its Article 34 organs) being added as an entity to the SDN List (i.e., being a “blocked person”), or an official designation notice stating the ICC (or such an organ) is a blocked person under E.O. 14203/31 CFR part 528.\n\nRecent and historical context relevant to forecasting:\n- Reuters reported on September 22, 2025, that the United States was considering imposing sanctions “as soon as this week” against the entire ICC, with multiple sources indicating an “entity‑wide” move was being weighed. The report described potential operational impacts and noted the ICC took precautionary steps (e.g., salary payments) in anticipation of possible sanctions.\n- Earlier in 2025, Reuters reported the ICC was preparing for potential U.S. sanctions, and noted the U.S. House of Representatives had voted in January 2025 to sanction the court over cases involving Israel.\n- For historical context, in 2021 President Biden terminated the national emergency and revoked the 2020 order that had authorized sanctions related to certain ICC personnel. In 2020, OFAC had published ICC‑related sanctions regulations pursuant to E.O. 13928, targeting certain ICC officials.\n\nDisambiguations and exclusions for clarity:\n- The International Criminal Court (ICC) is distinct from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and from the International Chamber of Commerce (also sometimes abbreviated “ICC”). Only actions naming the International Criminal Court or any organ defined in Article 34 of the Rome Statute count.\n- Sanctions limited to individuals (e.g., specific prosecutors or judges), visa bans, or other punitive measures not amounting to the ICC (or an Article 34 organ) being a blocked person do not count.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"b706af2d68312498\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Question: Will the United States designate the International Criminal Court (or any of its Article 34 organs) as a blocked person on OFAC’s SDN List between 2025‑10‑15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 UTC?\n\nStart and end dates (UTC):\n- Eligible actions must occur between 2025‑10‑15 00:00:00 UTC and 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 UTC (inclusive).\n\nOperational definitions:\n- “International Criminal Court” refers to the intergovernmental organization and tribunal seated in The Hague, Netherlands, established under the Rome Statute.\n- “Organs of the Court” means the four categories enumerated in Article 34 of the Rome Statute: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre‑Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; (d) The Registry.\n- “Blocked person on OFAC’s SDN List” means the entity appears by name on the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List, which consists of individuals and entities whose property and interests in property are blocked and with whom U.S. persons are generally prohibited from dealing.\n\nResolution rules:\n- YES if, during the time window, either of the following occurs:\n 1) The exact entity name “International Criminal Court” (or an Article 34 organ named as a distinct entity, e.g., “Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court”) is added as a named entry to OFAC’s SDN List.\n 2) The U.S. government (Treasury/OFAC or the White House/State in coordination with OFAC) publishes an official designation action during the time window that explicitly states the International Criminal Court (or any Article 34 organ) is designated as a blocked person under E.O. 14203 and/or 31 CFR part 528, such that the entity is subject to blocking sanctions applicable to SDNs. If list publication timing differs from the announcement but the announcement is within the window and unambiguously designates the entity as a blocked person, count as YES.\n- NO otherwise, including if:\n • Only individual ICC officials are sanctioned; or\n • Only travel bans/visa restrictions are imposed; or\n • Measures target persons supporting the ICC but not the ICC or its Article 34 organs; or\n • Any relevant action occurs wholly before 2025‑10‑15 00:00:00 UTC or after 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\nPrimary resolution sources:\n- OFAC’s SDN List (for presence or absence of the ICC or any Article 34 organ as a blocked person).\n- Official designation announcements and/or regulatory notices establishing the applicable sanctions program authority (E.O. 14203; 31 CFR part 528).\n\nNotes to resolvers:\n- Disregard similarly named entities such as the International Court of Justice or the International Chamber of Commerce; only the ICC as defined above or its Article 34 organs qualify.\n- Use the entity name as it appears in official sources; abbreviations alone (e.g., “ICC”) are insufficient unless the source clearly identifies the International Criminal Court as defined above.\n- If there is any ambiguity, adjudicate based on whether the official action expressly renders the ICC (or its Article 34 organ) a “blocked person” subject to SDN‑style blocking sanctions under the cited authorities.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40654, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763179011.51609, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.2 ], "centers": [ 0.265 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.31 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763179011.51609, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.2 ], "centers": [ 0.265 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.31 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.735, 0.265 ], "means": [ 0.28722988505747127 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 10.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 9.0, 1.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 15.0, 1.0, 0.0, 8.0, 2.0, 11.0, 2.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, 5.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 88, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Definition and scope of the target entity:\n- The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an intergovernmental organization and international tribunal seated in The Hague, Netherlands, established under the Rome Statute in 2002.\n- The Rome Statute defines the “organs of the Court” in Article 34 as: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre‑Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; and (d) The Registry. For this question, “organs of the Court” refers exactly to those four categories, and designations of any such organ as a distinct entity count for resolution.\n\nU.S. sanctions authority and program context (as of 2025-10-01):\n- On February 6, 2025, Executive Order (E.O.) 14203, “Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court,” declared a national emergency related to the ICC’s actions and created sanctions authorities targeting persons involved in ICC efforts to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute certain “protected persons.” The order defines “person” to include individuals and entities.\n- On July 1, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued the International Criminal Court‑Related Sanctions Regulations at 31 CFR part 528 to implement E.O. 14203.\n- OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) List contains the names of individuals and entities whose property and interests in property are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from dealing with them. This question operationalizes “entity‑wide sanctions” as the ICC (or any of its Article 34 organs) being added as an entity to the SDN List (i.e., being a “blocked person”), or an official designation notice stating the ICC (or such an organ) is a blocked person under E.O. 14203/31 CFR part 528.\n\nRecent and historical context relevant to forecasting:\n- Reuters reported on September 22, 2025, that the United States was considering imposing sanctions “as soon as this week” against the entire ICC, with multiple sources indicating an “entity‑wide” move was being weighed. The report described potential operational impacts and noted the ICC took precautionary steps (e.g., salary payments) in anticipation of possible sanctions.\n- Earlier in 2025, Reuters reported the ICC was preparing for potential U.S. sanctions, and noted the U.S. House of Representatives had voted in January 2025 to sanction the court over cases involving Israel.\n- For historical context, in 2021 President Biden terminated the national emergency and revoked the 2020 order that had authorized sanctions related to certain ICC personnel. In 2020, OFAC had published ICC‑related sanctions regulations pursuant to E.O. 13928, targeting certain ICC officials.\n\nDisambiguations and exclusions for clarity:\n- The International Criminal Court (ICC) is distinct from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and from the International Chamber of Commerce (also sometimes abbreviated “ICC”). Only actions naming the International Criminal Court or any organ defined in Article 34 of the Rome Statute count.\n- Sanctions limited to individuals (e.g., specific prosecutors or judges), visa bans, or other punitive measures not amounting to the ICC (or an Article 34 organ) being a blocked person do not count.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"b706af2d68312498\"}}`" }, { "id": 40653, "title": "In December 2025, will UN2720 “Collected from crossings” trucks total at least 2,170 (≥70 per day on average)?", "short_title": "In December 2025, will UN2720 “Collected from crossings” trucks total at least 2,170 (≥70 per day on", "url_title": "In December 2025, will UN2720 “Collected from crossings” trucks total at least 2,170 (≥70 per day on", "slug": "in-december-2025-will-un2720-collected-from-crossings-trucks-total-at-least-2170-70-per-day-on", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:12.403214Z", "published_at": "2025-11-15T09:19:02Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T10:50:00.253956Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:12.719422Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T10:49:02Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T10:49:02Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-15T09:19:02Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40249, "title": "In December 2025, will UN2720 “Collected from crossings” trucks total at least 2,170 (≥70 per day on average)?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:12.403615Z", "open_time": "2025-11-15T09:19:02Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T10:49:02Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T10:49:02Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T10:49:02Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T10:49:02Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Summary of indicator and current context (as of 2025-09-30)\n- Indicator and source: The UN2720 Mechanism’s Monitoring & Tracking Dashboard reports “UN‑Manifested Humanitarian Aid Movements since 19 May 2025,” including items “Collected From any of the crossings along Gaza’s perimeter,” with metrics for Pallets, Trucks, Weight (t), and Requests. The dashboard explains that trucks on the Gaza side are typically smaller than those arriving from the Israeli side, so the numbers are not directly comparable across sides. The UN2720 Mechanism is the official UN‑facilitated system to register, coordinate, monitor, and verify humanitarian consignments to Gaza across corridors (Jordan, maritime via Ashdod/CMC, West Bank/Israel), with monitors deployed to crossings, warehouses, and distribution sites; it supports pre‑clearance, coordination, and end‑use verification.\n- Recent data and volatility: OCHA reported that “Between 12 and 22 September 2025, 436 truckloads were collected through the UN 2720 mechanism from Gaza’s crossings, compared with about 1,040 truckloads collected in the previous 11‑day period between 1 and 11 September, marking a 58 per cent decrease”. In August, about a quarter of the supplies entering Gaza via the UN2720 mechanism came through Jordan (mostly via Allenby), underlining corridor dependence and potential chokepoints. For broader context on targets, OCHA has referenced an overall objective of 600 trucks/day entering Gaza in a ceasefire scenario (with a mix of commercial, UN/INGO, and Red Crescent/bilateral donations), illustrating the scale of needs relative to actual flows.\n- Recurring publications: UN and UNOPS have published recurring monthly “UN 2720 Mechanism for Gaza – Monthly Overviews” (infographics) through at least August 2025, indicating a regular cadence of mechanism data releases that can corroborate figures.\nWhy this threshold? Early September (1–11) averaged about 94.5/day, while 12–22 September averaged about 39.6/day, showing substantial variability; a December threshold equivalent to 70/day (2,170 trucks over 31 days) sits between these baselines, aiming for a high‑uncertainty, decision‑relevant target.\nDefinitions\n- UN2720 Mechanism: The UN‑facilitated system for registering, coordinating, monitoring, and verifying humanitarian consignments to Gaza, including pre‑clearance with relevant authorities, corridor‑specific coordination, and monitoring by deployed UN2720 Monitors. Official site: https://info.un2720.org/\n- Collected from crossings: As per the UN2720 dashboard, items “Collected From any of the crossings along Gaza’s perimeter” on the Gaza side; dashboard metrics include “Trucks” (count of trucks), “Pallets,” “Weight (t),” and “Requests.” Note that trucks on the Gaza side are typically smaller than those on the Israeli side, so counts are not directly comparable to trucks reaching the crossing from outside. Dashboard: https://app.un2720.org/tracking/collected\n- Truck (for this question): The “Trucks” metric as displayed on the UN2720 Monitoring & Tracking Dashboard under the “Collected From Crossings” view.\n- Average daily number (for this question): For December 2025, this is equivalent to total “Trucks – Collected from crossings” between 2025‑12‑01 00:00:00 and 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 (UTC), divided by 31. To avoid rounding ambiguity, the resolution uses the equivalent total threshold of 2,170 trucks (31 × 70).\nStatus quo takeaway (as of late September 2025): UN2720‑tracked aid “collected” within Gaza showed sharp intra‑month volatility in September, with mid‑September flows roughly half of early September, highlighting uncertainty heading into Q4 2025. The mechanism’s routing mix (e.g., Jordan/Allenby) and operational constraints remain key determinants of realized truck counts.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"92f0c04cb74866cf\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Question: In December 2025, will UN2720 “Collected from crossings” trucks total at least 2,170 (i.e., an average of ≥70 per day over 31 days)?\nTimeframe: Consider aid collected between 2025‑12‑01 00:00:00 UTC and 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 UTC.\nPrimary metric and method:\n- Use the UN2720 Monitoring & Tracking Dashboard’s “Collected From Crossings” view (https://app.un2720.org/tracking/collected) and the “Trucks” metric.\n- Determine the total number of trucks collected within the timeframe above. If the dashboard provides a date‑range selector for December 1–31, use it. If instead it provides a daily series, sum the “Trucks – Collected” daily values for the specified UTC window. If both are available, either method is acceptable if totals match; if not, prefer the native December 1–31 total.\n- Resolve YES if the total is ≥2,170; otherwise resolve NO.\nData handling and edge cases:\n- Time zone: Use UTC for the inclusion window. If the dashboard’s time filtering or labeling lacks an explicit time zone, interpret all dates/times as UTC for this question’s purposes.\n- If the UN2720 dashboard is temporarily inaccessible or not rendering the December breakdown at 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 UTC, attempt again within a reasonable time on 2025‑12‑31. If still inaccessible, use the most recent OCHA oPt “Humanitarian Situation Update” or equivalent OCHA publication that explicitly states the total number of truckloads/trucks “collected through the UN 2720 mechanism” for December 2025; if multiple, prefer the latest OCHA consolidated month‑end figure on the OCHA oPt site; ReliefWeb mirrors are acceptable sources. Precedent for such reporting (e.g., September 2025 mid‑month and early‑month totals) exists in OCHA Situation Update #326. Monthly UN2720 “Monthly Overviews” published by UN/UNOPS (as listed on ReliefWeb) may also be used if they explicitly provide the December 2025 “Collected – Trucks” total.\n- Terminology alignment: This question uses the “Trucks” unit precisely as displayed by the UN2720 dashboard under “Collected From Crossings” (not “trucks arriving at the crossing” on the Israeli side), consistent with the dashboard’s own explanatory note about differing truck sizes across the boundary.\n- Conflicting figures: If different official UN sources for December 2025 show conflicting totals, prefer the UN2720 dashboard’s December‑range total; if unavailable, prefer the latest OCHA oPt consolidated month‑end figure, as per the precedence of OCHA Situation Updates referencing UN2720 data.\n- Verification ease: A resolver should be able to capture a screenshot or export from the UN2720 dashboard showing the December 1–31 “Collected – Trucks” total and compare it to the 2,170 threshold at or immediately after 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 UTC.\nResolution: YES if the December 2025 total “Collected – Trucks” is ≥2,170; NO otherwise.\nCitations supporting definitions and precedent for data sources: UN2720 mechanism definitions and dashboard metrics ; OCHA Situation Update #326 with explicit “truckloads collected through the UN 2720 mechanism” language and mid‑September vs early‑September figures ; OCHA update on August corridor shares (Jordan/Allenby) for context ; reference targets context ; recurring monthly UN2720 overviews.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40653, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763203724.417252, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.35 ], "centers": [ 0.52 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.698 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763203724.417252, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.35 ], "centers": [ 0.52 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.698 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.48, 0.52 ], "means": [ 0.5130116279069766 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 8.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 7.0, 0.0, 1.0, 3.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 5.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 10.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 90, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Summary of indicator and current context (as of 2025-09-30)\n- Indicator and source: The UN2720 Mechanism’s Monitoring & Tracking Dashboard reports “UN‑Manifested Humanitarian Aid Movements since 19 May 2025,” including items “Collected From any of the crossings along Gaza’s perimeter,” with metrics for Pallets, Trucks, Weight (t), and Requests. The dashboard explains that trucks on the Gaza side are typically smaller than those arriving from the Israeli side, so the numbers are not directly comparable across sides. The UN2720 Mechanism is the official UN‑facilitated system to register, coordinate, monitor, and verify humanitarian consignments to Gaza across corridors (Jordan, maritime via Ashdod/CMC, West Bank/Israel), with monitors deployed to crossings, warehouses, and distribution sites; it supports pre‑clearance, coordination, and end‑use verification.\n- Recent data and volatility: OCHA reported that “Between 12 and 22 September 2025, 436 truckloads were collected through the UN 2720 mechanism from Gaza’s crossings, compared with about 1,040 truckloads collected in the previous 11‑day period between 1 and 11 September, marking a 58 per cent decrease”. In August, about a quarter of the supplies entering Gaza via the UN2720 mechanism came through Jordan (mostly via Allenby), underlining corridor dependence and potential chokepoints. For broader context on targets, OCHA has referenced an overall objective of 600 trucks/day entering Gaza in a ceasefire scenario (with a mix of commercial, UN/INGO, and Red Crescent/bilateral donations), illustrating the scale of needs relative to actual flows.\n- Recurring publications: UN and UNOPS have published recurring monthly “UN 2720 Mechanism for Gaza – Monthly Overviews” (infographics) through at least August 2025, indicating a regular cadence of mechanism data releases that can corroborate figures.\nWhy this threshold? Early September (1–11) averaged about 94.5/day, while 12–22 September averaged about 39.6/day, showing substantial variability; a December threshold equivalent to 70/day (2,170 trucks over 31 days) sits between these baselines, aiming for a high‑uncertainty, decision‑relevant target.\nDefinitions\n- UN2720 Mechanism: The UN‑facilitated system for registering, coordinating, monitoring, and verifying humanitarian consignments to Gaza, including pre‑clearance with relevant authorities, corridor‑specific coordination, and monitoring by deployed UN2720 Monitors. Official site: https://info.un2720.org/\n- Collected from crossings: As per the UN2720 dashboard, items “Collected From any of the crossings along Gaza’s perimeter” on the Gaza side; dashboard metrics include “Trucks” (count of trucks), “Pallets,” “Weight (t),” and “Requests.” Note that trucks on the Gaza side are typically smaller than those on the Israeli side, so counts are not directly comparable to trucks reaching the crossing from outside. Dashboard: https://app.un2720.org/tracking/collected\n- Truck (for this question): The “Trucks” metric as displayed on the UN2720 Monitoring & Tracking Dashboard under the “Collected From Crossings” view.\n- Average daily number (for this question): For December 2025, this is equivalent to total “Trucks – Collected from crossings” between 2025‑12‑01 00:00:00 and 2025‑12‑31 23:59:59 (UTC), divided by 31. To avoid rounding ambiguity, the resolution uses the equivalent total threshold of 2,170 trucks (31 × 70).\nStatus quo takeaway (as of late September 2025): UN2720‑tracked aid “collected” within Gaza showed sharp intra‑month volatility in September, with mid‑September flows roughly half of early September, highlighting uncertainty heading into Q4 2025. The mechanism’s routing mix (e.g., Jordan/Allenby) and operational constraints remain key determinants of realized truck counts.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"92f0c04cb74866cf\"}}`" }, { "id": 40652, "title": "UEFA Champions League 2025/26: Will Atlético de Madrid be ranked 1–16 in the league-phase table at 23:59 CET on December 10, 2025?", "short_title": "UEFA Champions League 2025/26: Will Atlético de Madrid be ranked 1–16 in the league-phase table at 2", "url_title": "UEFA Champions League 2025/26: Will Atlético de Madrid be ranked 1–16 in the league-phase table at 2", "slug": "uefa-champions-league-202526-will-atletico-de-madrid-be-ranked-116-in-the-league-phase-table-at-2", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:12.024229Z", "published_at": "2025-11-15T00:14:26Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T01:45:00.278959Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:12.229115Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T01:44:26Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T01:44:26Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-15T00:14:26Z", "nr_forecasters": 80, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40248, "title": "UEFA Champions League 2025/26: Will Atlético de Madrid be ranked 1–16 in the league-phase table at 23:59 CET on December 10, 2025?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:12.024656Z", "open_time": "2025-11-15T00:14:26Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T01:44:26Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T01:44:26Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T01:44:26Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T01:44:26Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Context as of 2025-09-30: UEFA introduced a new Champions League format beginning in 2024/25, with a single “league phase” involving 36 clubs, each playing eight matches against eight different opponents (four home, four away). Teams are ranked in one table; the top eight qualify directly for the Round of 16, and places 9–24 enter two-legged play-offs, while 25–36 are eliminated.\n\nFor the 2025/26 season, UEFA’s official match calendar lists the league-phase matchdays as: MD1 (16–18 Sep 2025), MD2 (30 Sep–1 Oct 2025), MD3 (21/22 Oct 2025), MD4 (4/5 Nov 2025), MD5 (25/26 Nov 2025), MD6 (9/10 Dec 2025), MD7 (20/21 Jan 2026), MD8 (28 Jan 2026). UEFA’s running fixtures/results page confirms specific MD6 fixtures across Tuesday, 9 December, and Wednesday, 10 December 2025; notably, PSV Eindhoven vs Atlético de Madrid is scheduled for Tuesday, 9 December 2025. The league phase is underway by mid-September, and standings are updated on UEFA.com as results come in.\n\nResolution source: UEFA maintains an official league-phase standings page for the UEFA Champions League 2025/26 that displays the current ranked table of clubs and is updated throughout the competition.\n\nDefinitions and links:\n- “UEFA Champions League 2025/26 league phase” refers to UEFA’s first-round competition format featuring 36 teams ranked in a single table, with eight matches per club. Official competition pages: fixtures/results and standings published on UEFA.com.\n- “Atlético de Madrid” (also referred to by UEFA as “Atleti”) means the Spanish club commonly known in English as Atlético Madrid; see club page on UEFA.com and general reference on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atl%C3%A9tico_Madrid.\n- “Rank” means the ordinal position shown on UEFA’s official 2025/26 league-phase standings page at the specified check time.\n- Time zone: “CET” is Central European Time (UTC+1 in December); see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_European_Time.\n\nStatus quo summary: By MD6 (9–10 Dec 2025), all clubs are scheduled to have completed six of their eight league-phase matches, and UEFA’s standings page will reflect their positions accordingly. This cutoff around 1–16 is competitive and plausibly uncertain for Atlético de Madrid under the 36-team league table.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"489361b523a6a1a4\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Check the official UEFA Champions League 2025/26 league-phase standings page (UEFA.com) at 23:59 CET (UTC+1) on Wednesday, December 10, 2025.\n\n- Outcome: Yes if Atlético de Madrid’s displayed numerical rank on that page is between 1 and 16 inclusive at that time; No otherwise.\n- What to read: Use the ordinal rank exactly as shown on the UEFA standings page; do not recompute standings or apply external tie-breakers.\n- Eligible results period: Consider all official 2025/26 league-phase matches played from 00:00 UTC on September 16, 2025 up to the check time; matches played or validated after the check time do not affect resolution.\n- If the live standings page is inaccessible at the check time: Use a reliable archived snapshot of the same page captured as close as possible to 23:59 CET on December 10, 2025 and no later than December 31, 2025. Prefer archives showing the timestamp and the page content consistent with UEFA’s standings.\n- Naming: Atlético de Madrid may be listed by UEFA as “Atleti” or “Atlético de Madrid”; any such official naming on UEFA.com refers to the same club for the purposes of this question.\n\nThe question resolves on December 10, 2025 (within the October 15–December 31, 2025 window). All determinations are made solely from UEFA’s official standings page or a reliable archive thereof.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40652, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763170958.210753, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 80, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.6 ], "centers": [ 0.65 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.75 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763170958.210753, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 80, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.6 ], "centers": [ 0.65 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.75 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.35, 0.65 ], "means": [ 0.6503750000000001 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 5.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 2.0, 14.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 15.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 80, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Context as of 2025-09-30: UEFA introduced a new Champions League format beginning in 2024/25, with a single “league phase” involving 36 clubs, each playing eight matches against eight different opponents (four home, four away). Teams are ranked in one table; the top eight qualify directly for the Round of 16, and places 9–24 enter two-legged play-offs, while 25–36 are eliminated.\n\nFor the 2025/26 season, UEFA’s official match calendar lists the league-phase matchdays as: MD1 (16–18 Sep 2025), MD2 (30 Sep–1 Oct 2025), MD3 (21/22 Oct 2025), MD4 (4/5 Nov 2025), MD5 (25/26 Nov 2025), MD6 (9/10 Dec 2025), MD7 (20/21 Jan 2026), MD8 (28 Jan 2026). UEFA’s running fixtures/results page confirms specific MD6 fixtures across Tuesday, 9 December, and Wednesday, 10 December 2025; notably, PSV Eindhoven vs Atlético de Madrid is scheduled for Tuesday, 9 December 2025. The league phase is underway by mid-September, and standings are updated on UEFA.com as results come in.\n\nResolution source: UEFA maintains an official league-phase standings page for the UEFA Champions League 2025/26 that displays the current ranked table of clubs and is updated throughout the competition.\n\nDefinitions and links:\n- “UEFA Champions League 2025/26 league phase” refers to UEFA’s first-round competition format featuring 36 teams ranked in a single table, with eight matches per club. Official competition pages: fixtures/results and standings published on UEFA.com.\n- “Atlético de Madrid” (also referred to by UEFA as “Atleti”) means the Spanish club commonly known in English as Atlético Madrid; see club page on UEFA.com and general reference on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atl%C3%A9tico_Madrid.\n- “Rank” means the ordinal position shown on UEFA’s official 2025/26 league-phase standings page at the specified check time.\n- Time zone: “CET” is Central European Time (UTC+1 in December); see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_European_Time.\n\nStatus quo summary: By MD6 (9–10 Dec 2025), all clubs are scheduled to have completed six of their eight league-phase matches, and UEFA’s standings page will reflect their positions accordingly. This cutoff around 1–16 is competitive and plausibly uncertain for Atlético de Madrid under the 36-team league table.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"489361b523a6a1a4\"}}`" }, { "id": 40651, "title": "By December 31, 2025 (23:59:59 UTC), will the United States publish an official instrument that explicitly caps tariffs on EU- or Japan‑origin pharmaceutical products at 15% ad valorem?", "short_title": "By December 31, 2025 (23:59:59 UTC), will the United States publish an official instrument that expl", "url_title": "By December 31, 2025 (23:59:59 UTC), will the United States publish an official instrument that expl", "slug": "by-december-31-2025-235959-utc-will-the-united-states-publish-an-official-instrument-that-expl", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:11.564015Z", "published_at": "2025-11-14T23:04:08Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-15T00:35:00.288886Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:11.831912Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T00:34:08Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T00:34:08Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-14T23:04:08Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40247, "title": "By December 31, 2025 (23:59:59 UTC), will the United States publish an official instrument that explicitly caps tariffs on EU- or Japan‑origin pharmaceutical products at 15% ad valorem?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:11.564439Z", "open_time": "2025-11-14T23:04:08Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-15T00:34:08Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-15T00:34:08Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-15T00:34:08Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-15T00:34:08Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-09-30:\n- EU framework implementation: A Federal Register notice amending the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) to implement elements of the August 21, 2025 U.S.–EU framework states that, for automobiles and parts, the combined tariff rate (MFN plus reduced Section 232 rate) is capped at 15% ad valorem for EU‑origin products and that certain goods (including generic pharmaceuticals and their ingredients and chemical precursors) are treated separately. CBP subsequently issued guidance explaining HTSUS implementation details, including an exemption from reciprocal tariffs for EU generic pharmaceuticals (using heading 9903.02.77), effective September 1, 2025.\n- Japan agreement implementation: A Federal Register notice implementing tariff‑related elements of the U.S.–Japan agreement establishes a baseline 15% ad valorem tariff structure for nearly all Japanese imports, with sector‑specific treatment for automobiles, aerospace, generic pharmaceuticals, and certain natural resources; it includes effective‑date and in‑transit exceptions. A White House presidential action page similarly describes the baseline 15% structure and authorizes zero reciprocal tariffs for generic pharmaceuticals and related inputs.\n- Public statements on pharmaceuticals: Reuters reported EU and Japan officials’ confidence that U.S. tariffs on pharmaceuticals would not exceed 15% under joint statements with Washington, referencing a 15% ceiling for EU exports including pharmaceuticals. CNN reported President Trump’s announcement of a 100% tariff on branded/patented pharmaceutical products effective October 1, 2025, while noting that the White House confirmed it would honor a 15% tariff cap agreed in trade deals with the EU and Japan, implying capped rates for EU/Japan‑origin pharmaceuticals.\n\nInterpretation and current uncertainty:\n- As of today, specific codified HTSUS or agency‑level text that explicitly caps EU‑ or Japan‑origin pharmaceutical products at 15% ad valorem (covering all HTSUS Chapter 30 pharmaceuticals, not only generics) has not been clearly identified in the cited notices; autos and certain sectoral carve‑outs are explicitly treated, and generic pharmaceuticals are addressed separately (exemptions/zero reciprocal tariffs), but an explicit 15% cap covering pharmaceutical products broadly would require a further instrument or explicit language.\n\nKey definitions and scope for forecasters:\n- Pharmaceutical products: For this question, “pharmaceutical products” means goods classified under HTSUS Chapter 30 (“Pharmaceutical Products”). See HTSUS Chapter 30 (U.S. International Trade Commission) at https://hts.usitc.gov/reststop/file?release=currentRelease&filename=Chapter%2030.\n- Country of origin: Determined under U.S. non‑preferential rules of origin and CBP practice (see 19 CFR Part 102, Rules of Origin) at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-19/chapter-I/part-102.\n- Tariff (ad valorem): A customs duty stated as a percentage of the customs value (see “Tariff” overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff; “Ad valorem tax”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_valorem_tax).\n- EU and Japan: The European Union (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union) and Japan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan).\n\nWhy this is forecastable with meaningful entropy:\n- Public statements indicate intent to cap EU/Japan pharmaceutical tariffs at 15%, but codification specific to pharmaceuticals—especially patented/brand‑name drugs—may require additional instruments (e.g., HTSUS modifications or agency guidance) that could be issued or not by year‑end. The interplay between the baseline 15% Japanese tariff structure and sector‑specific carve‑outs, and the EU framework’s sectoral exemptions, leaves open whether an explicit cross‑sector cap for pharmaceuticals will be published in official text.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"dbd2e3d3004b59ad\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Event window and resolution time:\n- Window: From 2025-10-15 00:00:00 UTC through 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n- Resolve at 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC.\n\nQuestion resolves “Yes” if, within the window, a U.S. official instrument is publicly posted that explicitly establishes a 15% ad valorem maximum (cap/ceiling) applicable to pharmaceutical products of EU or Japan origin, as defined below. Otherwise “No.”\n\nQualifying official instrument (any one suffices):\n- A Federal Register notice (Commerce/USTR/CBP) that amends the HTSUS or sets tariff application rules, or a Presidential Executive Order/Proclamation posted on whitehouse.gov/federalregister.gov, or a CBP CSMS bulletin/guidance, or an official USTR or Commerce directive/notice that is publicly accessible on an official.gov domain.\n\nWhat “explicitly caps at 15%” means:\n- The instrument must, in its operative language, state either: (a) “pharmaceutical” or “pharmaceutical products” or otherwise clearly reference HTSUS Chapter 30 goods and an applied tariff ceiling of 15% ad valorem for EU‑ or Japan‑origin entries; or (b) provide HTSUS modifications or headings that unambiguously result in a combined applied duty rate (base Column 1 duty plus any additional duties under Sections 232/301/IEEPA/reciprocal tariffs, etc.) not exceeding 15% ad valorem for EU‑ or Japan‑origin Chapter 30 entries.\n- The cap must apply to pharmaceutical products broadly (HTSUS Chapter 30) and not be limited solely to “generic” pharmaceuticals; instruments that only exempt generics (non‑patented pharmaceutical applications) without capping branded/patented products do not qualify.\n\nScope definitions for resolution:\n- “Pharmaceutical products”: All goods classifiable under HTSUS Chapter 30. Link: https://hts.usitc.gov/reststop/file?release=currentRelease&filename=Chapter%2030.\n- “EU‑ or Japan‑origin”: Country of origin determined under U.S. non‑preferential rules of origin. Link: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-19/chapter-I/part-102.\n- “Tariff” and “ad valorem”: A duty assessed as a percentage of customs value. Links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_valorem_tax.\n- “Official instrument” and “published”: Content posted on official U.S. government sites (e.g., federalregister.gov, whitehouse.gov, cbp.gov, ustr.gov, commerce.gov) that is public by the resolution time.\n\nVerification guidance for resolvers:\n- Check Federal Register notices implementing EU or Japan frameworks and any subsequent amendments for explicit pharmaceutical 15% cap language or HTSUS headings that produce a 15% ceiling.\n- Review White House presidential actions and Executive Orders that might modify reciprocal tariffs or sectoral treatment.\n- Review CBP CSMS bulletins/guidance for tariff application instructions to Chapter 30 entries from EU or Japan (note: existing CSMS already exempts generics but does not constitute a broad cap).\n- Cross‑check credible reporting only as confirmation of official issuance (e.g., Reuters/CNN), but the resolution requires the instrument itself to meet the explicit cap standard; statements of intent alone do not qualify.\n\nEdge cases:\n- If multiple instruments exist and one meets the explicit cap standard, resolve “Yes,” even if others are silent or conflicting.\n- If an instrument establishes a 15% ceiling for only EU or only Japan pharmaceutical products, resolve “Yes.”\n- If an instrument caps only a subset of Chapter 30 (e.g., specific headings) and leaves others above 15%, resolve “No.”\n- If an instrument provides exemptions or zero reciprocal tariffs for generic pharmaceuticals only, with no cap on branded/patented products, resolve “No”.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40651, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763164795.873298, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "centers": [ 0.3 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.35 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763164795.873298, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.25 ], "centers": [ 0.3 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.35 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.7, 0.3 ], "means": [ 0.3327441860465115 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 8.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 15.0, 0.0, 1.0, 2.0, 0.0, 9.0, 1.0, 2.0, 2.0, 0.0, 20.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 88, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Status quo as of 2025-09-30:\n- EU framework implementation: A Federal Register notice amending the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) to implement elements of the August 21, 2025 U.S.–EU framework states that, for automobiles and parts, the combined tariff rate (MFN plus reduced Section 232 rate) is capped at 15% ad valorem for EU‑origin products and that certain goods (including generic pharmaceuticals and their ingredients and chemical precursors) are treated separately. CBP subsequently issued guidance explaining HTSUS implementation details, including an exemption from reciprocal tariffs for EU generic pharmaceuticals (using heading 9903.02.77), effective September 1, 2025.\n- Japan agreement implementation: A Federal Register notice implementing tariff‑related elements of the U.S.–Japan agreement establishes a baseline 15% ad valorem tariff structure for nearly all Japanese imports, with sector‑specific treatment for automobiles, aerospace, generic pharmaceuticals, and certain natural resources; it includes effective‑date and in‑transit exceptions. A White House presidential action page similarly describes the baseline 15% structure and authorizes zero reciprocal tariffs for generic pharmaceuticals and related inputs.\n- Public statements on pharmaceuticals: Reuters reported EU and Japan officials’ confidence that U.S. tariffs on pharmaceuticals would not exceed 15% under joint statements with Washington, referencing a 15% ceiling for EU exports including pharmaceuticals. CNN reported President Trump’s announcement of a 100% tariff on branded/patented pharmaceutical products effective October 1, 2025, while noting that the White House confirmed it would honor a 15% tariff cap agreed in trade deals with the EU and Japan, implying capped rates for EU/Japan‑origin pharmaceuticals.\n\nInterpretation and current uncertainty:\n- As of today, specific codified HTSUS or agency‑level text that explicitly caps EU‑ or Japan‑origin pharmaceutical products at 15% ad valorem (covering all HTSUS Chapter 30 pharmaceuticals, not only generics) has not been clearly identified in the cited notices; autos and certain sectoral carve‑outs are explicitly treated, and generic pharmaceuticals are addressed separately (exemptions/zero reciprocal tariffs), but an explicit 15% cap covering pharmaceutical products broadly would require a further instrument or explicit language.\n\nKey definitions and scope for forecasters:\n- Pharmaceutical products: For this question, “pharmaceutical products” means goods classified under HTSUS Chapter 30 (“Pharmaceutical Products”). See HTSUS Chapter 30 (U.S. International Trade Commission) at https://hts.usitc.gov/reststop/file?release=currentRelease&filename=Chapter%2030.\n- Country of origin: Determined under U.S. non‑preferential rules of origin and CBP practice (see 19 CFR Part 102, Rules of Origin) at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-19/chapter-I/part-102.\n- Tariff (ad valorem): A customs duty stated as a percentage of the customs value (see “Tariff” overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff; “Ad valorem tax”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_valorem_tax).\n- EU and Japan: The European Union (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union) and Japan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan).\n\nWhy this is forecastable with meaningful entropy:\n- Public statements indicate intent to cap EU/Japan pharmaceutical tariffs at 15%, but codification specific to pharmaceuticals—especially patented/brand‑name drugs—may require additional instruments (e.g., HTSUS modifications or agency guidance) that could be issued or not by year‑end. The interplay between the baseline 15% Japanese tariff structure and sector‑specific carve‑outs, and the EU framework’s sectoral exemptions, leaves open whether an explicit cross‑sector cap for pharmaceuticals will be published in official text.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"dbd2e3d3004b59ad\"}}`" }, { "id": 40650, "title": "On TRAC’s December 21, 2025 snapshot, will ICE’s total detained population be at least 60,000?", "short_title": "On TRAC’s December 21, 2025 snapshot, will ICE’s total detained population be at least 60,000?", "url_title": "On TRAC’s December 21, 2025 snapshot, will ICE’s total detained population be at least 60,000?", "slug": "on-tracs-december-21-2025-snapshot-will-ices-total-detained-population-be-at-least-60000", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:10.807831Z", "published_at": "2025-11-14T20:20:52Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-14T21:51:00.214407Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:11.147929Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-14T21:50:52Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-14T21:50:52Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-14T20:20:52Z", "nr_forecasters": 87, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40246, "title": "On TRAC’s December 21, 2025 snapshot, will ICE’s total detained population be at least 60,000?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:10.808243Z", "open_time": "2025-11-14T20:20:52Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-14T21:50:52Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-14T21:50:52Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-14T21:50:52Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-14T21:50:52Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Overview and status quo as of today (2025-10-01)\n- What is ICE and who runs immigration detention? U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a federal law enforcement agency within the Department of Homeland Security; ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) component manages civil immigration detention and removals. In the U.S., immigration detention is a civil (not criminal) form of custody used during immigration processing and removal; it is distinct from criminal incarceration and is complemented by Alternatives to Detention (ATD) programs that monitor some individuals in the community.\n\n- How is the “total detained population” typically measured? Journalistic guidance summarizing ICE data practices notes that the total detained population is counted as beds occupied at midnight on a single day (a snapshot), rather than, for example, an average across days.\n\n- Public, regularly updated source for timely snapshots: The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) publishes an Immigration Detention Quick Facts page that displays a single total for people “held in ICE detention,” labeled with “data current as of [DATE]”. As of late September 2025, TRAC reported: “Immigration and Customs Enforcement held 59,762 in ICE detention according to data current as of September 21, 2025,” and also reported 181,210 individuals monitored by ICE ATD programs as of September 20, 2025. TRAC additionally noted that 71.5% of the 59,762 had no criminal conviction, all using date-stamped snapshots. These details underscore that TRAC’s “held in ICE detention” figure is separate from ATD counts.\n\n- ICE’s own public statistics: ICE publishes Enforcement and Removal Operations statistics and detention data products, typically on a lag (“one quarter in arrears”), and provides definitions focused on book-ins and detainee categorizations. These official dashboards are not guaranteed to publish a day-specific “currently detained” total for a selected date in December 2025 by December 31, 2025, which is why TRAC’s dated snapshots are favored for timely resolution.\n\nWhy this question and why this threshold?\n- Detention utilization has risen in 2025, but week-to-week levels respond to enforcement intensity, border flows, available capacity, and legal constraints. TRAC’s late-September snapshot (59,762) sits near the 60,000 mark, making “≥ 60,000” a salient and uncertain threshold for a late-December snapshot. Forecasters can incorporate policy developments, seasonal patterns, and facility capacity dynamics when forming a view.\n\nKey term definitions used for this question\n- ICE: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a DHS agency. ERO, a component of ICE, manages civil immigration detention.\n- Immigration detention (civil): Custody for immigration control purposes (distinct from criminal incarceration), administered by ICE/CBP and often carried out in contracted facilities; some individuals may instead be supervised via ATD.\n- Total detained population (for resolution): The single number labeled by TRAC as “held in ICE detention … according to data current as of [DATE]” on its Immigration Detention Quick Facts page; this excludes individuals on ATD (which TRAC reports separately).\n- Snapshot: A single-day point-in-time count, conceptually measured as “beds occupied at midnight,” consistent with how such snapshots are commonly compiled and communicated in ICE-related reporting.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"0b096da21be9496f\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Outcome: YES if the TRAC total for individuals “held in ICE detention” on the designated snapshot date is ≥ 60,000; NO otherwise.\n\nSnapshot date and timezone\n- Designated snapshot date: Sunday, 2025-12-21 (UTC).\n- TRAC’s Quick Facts page displays “data current as of [DATE]” without a time; for this market, the resolver will match the calendar date shown on TRAC to the designated date. If the exact date is not shown, see fallback rules below.\n\nPrimary resolution source\n- TRAC Immigration Detention Quick Facts: https://tracreports.org/immigration/quickfacts/ \n- Use the total displayed in prose as: “Immigration and Customs Enforcement held [N] in ICE detention according to data current as of [DATE]” (or equivalent wording on that page). Record N and the displayed [DATE].\n\nDecision rule and fallbacks (applied in order)\n1) Exact-date rule: If TRAC shows “data current as of 2025-12-21,” compare its “held in ICE detention” total to 60,000 and resolve accordingly.\n2) Nearest subsequent-date rule: If no 2025-12-21 snapshot is displayed on TRAC by 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC, use the earliest TRAC snapshot with “data current as of” a date after 2025-12-21 and on or before 2025-12-31, and resolve based on that total.\n3) Latest prior-date rule: If no subsequent snapshot exists by 2025-12-31, use the latest TRAC snapshot with “data current as of” a date on or after 2025-12-14 and before 2025-12-22 (i.e., the nearest available prior snapshot within the week preceding the designated date).\n4) TRAC page unavailable fallback: If the Quick Facts page is inaccessible or lacks the total on 2025-12-31, use TRAC’s “What’s New” posts (https://tracreports.org/whatsnew/) that explicitly report the total “held in ICE detention” with a “data current as of [DATE]” label; apply the same date-selection logic as above. An example of the phrasing used by TRAC in such posts is: “Immigration and Customs Enforcement held 59,762 in ICE detention according to data current as of September 21, 2025”.\n5) Last-resort official source: Only if no TRAC source meeting the above criteria is accessible on 2025-12-31, the resolver may use an official ICE detention statistics file/dashboards published at https://www.ice.gov/statistics that provide a clearly date-stamped, day-specific snapshot of “currently detained” for a December 2025 date according to ICE’s own labeling; if present for 2025-12-21 (preferred) or a date between 2025-12-22 and 2025-12-31 (nearest subsequent), or between 2025-12-14 and 2025-12-20 (latest prior), apply the same date-selection logic. Note: ICE indicates some statistics are published one quarter in arrears and may not include a day-specific current total; therefore ICE is a last-resort fallback only.\n\nWhat exactly counts\n- The figure must be the TRAC Quick Facts total for those “held in ICE detention,” which is distinct from TRAC’s reported ATD enrollment; ATD participants do not count toward the detained total for this question.\n- Conceptually, the snapshot represents “beds occupied at midnight” on the snapshot date, consistent with how such daily totals are commonly counted; however, the operative value is exactly the total displayed by TRAC for its “data current as of [DATE]” snapshot.\n\nTiming and accessibility\n- All resolution steps and source checks must be performed no later than 2025-12-31 23:59:59 UTC. Publicly accessible pages or files (including reputable web archives of the specified pages as they appeared by that time) are acceptable.\n\nTiebreakers and discrepancies\n- If multiple qualifying sources are available (e.g., TRAC Quick Facts and a TRAC “What’s New” post for the same date) and they disagree, prefer the TRAC Quick Facts page for the final number. Only use ICE official statistics if no TRAC source satisfying the rules above is accessible by the resolution deadline.\n\nExamples and current baseline (non-binding)\n- Example of acceptable wording on TRAC: “Immigration and Customs Enforcement held 59,762 in ICE detention according to data current as of September 21, 2025”. As of that late-September snapshot, the total was 59,762 and 71.5% had no criminal conviction, while ATD monitoring stood at 181,210 as of September 20, 2025; these are included here only as context and do not affect resolution.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40650, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763156751.757754, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.55 ], "centers": [ 0.65 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.75 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763156751.757754, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.55 ], "centers": [ 0.65 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.75 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.35, 0.65 ], "means": [ 0.6495977011494254 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 5.0, 1.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 5.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 1.0, 12.0, 0.0, 1.0, 3.0, 0.0, 7.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 6.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 3.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.0, 2.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 91, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Overview and status quo as of today (2025-10-01)\n- What is ICE and who runs immigration detention? U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a federal law enforcement agency within the Department of Homeland Security; ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) component manages civil immigration detention and removals. In the U.S., immigration detention is a civil (not criminal) form of custody used during immigration processing and removal; it is distinct from criminal incarceration and is complemented by Alternatives to Detention (ATD) programs that monitor some individuals in the community.\n\n- How is the “total detained population” typically measured? Journalistic guidance summarizing ICE data practices notes that the total detained population is counted as beds occupied at midnight on a single day (a snapshot), rather than, for example, an average across days.\n\n- Public, regularly updated source for timely snapshots: The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) publishes an Immigration Detention Quick Facts page that displays a single total for people “held in ICE detention,” labeled with “data current as of [DATE]”. As of late September 2025, TRAC reported: “Immigration and Customs Enforcement held 59,762 in ICE detention according to data current as of September 21, 2025,” and also reported 181,210 individuals monitored by ICE ATD programs as of September 20, 2025. TRAC additionally noted that 71.5% of the 59,762 had no criminal conviction, all using date-stamped snapshots. These details underscore that TRAC’s “held in ICE detention” figure is separate from ATD counts.\n\n- ICE’s own public statistics: ICE publishes Enforcement and Removal Operations statistics and detention data products, typically on a lag (“one quarter in arrears”), and provides definitions focused on book-ins and detainee categorizations. These official dashboards are not guaranteed to publish a day-specific “currently detained” total for a selected date in December 2025 by December 31, 2025, which is why TRAC’s dated snapshots are favored for timely resolution.\n\nWhy this question and why this threshold?\n- Detention utilization has risen in 2025, but week-to-week levels respond to enforcement intensity, border flows, available capacity, and legal constraints. TRAC’s late-September snapshot (59,762) sits near the 60,000 mark, making “≥ 60,000” a salient and uncertain threshold for a late-December snapshot. Forecasters can incorporate policy developments, seasonal patterns, and facility capacity dynamics when forming a view.\n\nKey term definitions used for this question\n- ICE: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a DHS agency. ERO, a component of ICE, manages civil immigration detention.\n- Immigration detention (civil): Custody for immigration control purposes (distinct from criminal incarceration), administered by ICE/CBP and often carried out in contracted facilities; some individuals may instead be supervised via ATD.\n- Total detained population (for resolution): The single number labeled by TRAC as “held in ICE detention … according to data current as of [DATE]” on its Immigration Detention Quick Facts page; this excludes individuals on ATD (which TRAC reports separately).\n- Snapshot: A single-day point-in-time count, conceptually measured as “beds occupied at midnight,” consistent with how such snapshots are commonly compiled and communicated in ICE-related reporting.\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"0b096da21be9496f\"}}`" }, { "id": 40649, "title": "Will the 2025 North Atlantic Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) be at least 110.0 units by 23:59 UTC on December 31, 2025?", "short_title": "Will the 2025 North Atlantic Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) be at least 110.0 units by 23:59 UTC o", "url_title": "Will the 2025 North Atlantic Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) be at least 110.0 units by 23:59 UTC o", "slug": "will-the-2025-north-atlantic-accumulated-cyclone-energy-ace-be-at-least-1100-units-by-2359-utc-o", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:10.350533Z", "published_at": "2025-11-14T16:47:59Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-14T18:18:00.298109Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:10.581847Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-14T18:17:59Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-14T18:17:59Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-14T16:47:59Z", "nr_forecasters": 86, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40245, "title": "Will the 2025 North Atlantic Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) be at least 110.0 units by 23:59 UTC on December 31, 2025?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:10.350937Z", "open_time": "2025-11-14T16:47:59Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-14T18:17:59Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-14T18:17:59Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-14T18:17:59Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-14T18:17:59Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Definition and units. Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) is a metric of tropical cyclone activity computed by summing the squares of six-hourly maximum sustained winds (in knots) for all periods a system is at least tropical-storm strength (≥34 kt), and then scaling by 10−4; by convention, ACE is expressed in units of 10^4 kt^2 (often written simply as “units”). The ACE index can be summed for an individual storm, for a basin, or for a season.\n\nWhat “2025 North Atlantic ACE” means here. For this question, “2025 North Atlantic ACE” refers to the Total ACE (x10^4 kt^2) for the 2025 North Atlantic hurricane season as displayed on the National Hurricane Center (NHC) “North Atlantic Summary” page within the Tropical Cyclone Reports (TCR) section (https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/?text) That page presents a running season summary including “Total ACE (x10^4 kt^2)” for the current season and is periodically updated during the year.\n\nStatus quo as of late September 2025. As of 03:00 UTC on September 30, 2025, the season-to-date 2025 North Atlantic Total ACE was 83.2, with 9 named storms, 3 hurricanes, and 3 major hurricanes, per the NHC North Atlantic Summary and corroborated by the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season overview. The CSU Real-Time North Atlantic page lists the 2025 storms and per-storm ACE values and notes that its statistics are calculated from operational best tracks from NHC/CPHC/JTWC (useful for cross-checking), though the NHC summary is the authoritative source for this question.\n\nClimatology and timing context. By convention, the Atlantic hurricane season runs from June 1 through November 30, which historically covers over 97% of Atlantic tropical or subtropical cyclone activity; however, late-season storms can still form and contribute to ACE near or after the climatological peak. With ACE at 83.2 as of September 30, reaching or exceeding 110.0 by year-end would require roughly 26.8 additional ACE units across any subsequent 2025-season storms (simple arithmetic based on the stated figures).\n\nWhy this threshold. Given the season-to-date activity and the potential for October–December contributions, a 110.0-unit threshold is intended to balance plausibility for both outcomes and create room for informed disagreement among forecasters.\n\nKey terms and links for reference:\n- Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulated_cyclone_energy \n- NHC North Atlantic Summary (Total ACE shown): https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/?text \n- 2025 Atlantic hurricane season overview (context): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Atlantic_hurricane_season \n- CSU Real-Time North Atlantic statistics (backup/cross-check): https://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/index.php?loc=northatlantic\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"4207aa0e604bca06\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Outcome determination\n- Resolve YES if the NHC “North Atlantic Summary” page (https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/?text) displays a 2025 “Total ACE (x10^4 kt^2)” value greater than or equal to 110.0 at 23:59 UTC on December 31, 2025. Resolve NO otherwise.\n\nPrimary resolution source (authoritative)\n- National Hurricane Center (NHC) Tropical Cyclone Reports: North Atlantic Summary page (https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/?text) Use the value shown on this page for “Total ACE (x10^4 kt^2)” for the 2025 North Atlantic season at the resolution time. If needed, the resolver may rely on an archived capture (e.g., web archive) of that page as it appeared at or nearest to 23:59 UTC on December 31, 2025.\n\nBackup resolution source (if the primary page is inaccessible at resolution time)\n- Colorado State University (CSU) Real-Time North Atlantic statistics page (https://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/index.php?loc=northatlantic) If a single season-total ACE for 2025 is displayed on that page, use it as the “Total ACE (x10^4 kt^2)” at the resolution time. If a single total is not displayed, compute the total as the sum of the per-storm ACE values listed for all 2025 North Atlantic storms on that page as it appears at or nearest to 23:59 UTC on December 31, 2025, and compare that sum to the 110.0 threshold.\n\nDefinitions and units\n- ACE “units” are 10^4 kt^2 (equivalently, 10−4 kn^2), consistent with the standard definition of ACE; do not rescale values from the source pages. Use the numeric value as displayed on the resolution source page(s) (e.g., to one decimal place if that is how the value is presented).\n\nScope and timing clarifications\n- This question concerns the 2025 North Atlantic season ACE exactly as defined and displayed by the resolution source(s). It implicitly includes whatever storms the NHC assigns to the 2025 North Atlantic hurricane season (regardless of formation date) in its “Total ACE” tally.\n- The resolution timestamp is 23:59 UTC on December 31, 2025. If the primary source displays a clearly timestamped “as of” value near that time, use the value with the timestamp closest to the resolution time. If both sources are down or unavailable at the resolution time, the question remains pending until at least one source becomes available; post-season reanalysis after December 31, 2025 does not affect resolution once a value at the resolution time has been established.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40649, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763142544.85863, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.2 ], "centers": [ 0.635 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.95 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763142544.85863, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 86, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.2 ], "centers": [ 0.635 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.95 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.365, 0.635 ], "means": [ 0.566220930232558 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 11.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 7.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.0, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 12.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 88, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Definition and units. Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) is a metric of tropical cyclone activity computed by summing the squares of six-hourly maximum sustained winds (in knots) for all periods a system is at least tropical-storm strength (≥34 kt), and then scaling by 10−4; by convention, ACE is expressed in units of 10^4 kt^2 (often written simply as “units”). The ACE index can be summed for an individual storm, for a basin, or for a season.\n\nWhat “2025 North Atlantic ACE” means here. For this question, “2025 North Atlantic ACE” refers to the Total ACE (x10^4 kt^2) for the 2025 North Atlantic hurricane season as displayed on the National Hurricane Center (NHC) “North Atlantic Summary” page within the Tropical Cyclone Reports (TCR) section (https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/?text) That page presents a running season summary including “Total ACE (x10^4 kt^2)” for the current season and is periodically updated during the year.\n\nStatus quo as of late September 2025. As of 03:00 UTC on September 30, 2025, the season-to-date 2025 North Atlantic Total ACE was 83.2, with 9 named storms, 3 hurricanes, and 3 major hurricanes, per the NHC North Atlantic Summary and corroborated by the 2025 Atlantic hurricane season overview. The CSU Real-Time North Atlantic page lists the 2025 storms and per-storm ACE values and notes that its statistics are calculated from operational best tracks from NHC/CPHC/JTWC (useful for cross-checking), though the NHC summary is the authoritative source for this question.\n\nClimatology and timing context. By convention, the Atlantic hurricane season runs from June 1 through November 30, which historically covers over 97% of Atlantic tropical or subtropical cyclone activity; however, late-season storms can still form and contribute to ACE near or after the climatological peak. With ACE at 83.2 as of September 30, reaching or exceeding 110.0 by year-end would require roughly 26.8 additional ACE units across any subsequent 2025-season storms (simple arithmetic based on the stated figures).\n\nWhy this threshold. Given the season-to-date activity and the potential for October–December contributions, a 110.0-unit threshold is intended to balance plausibility for both outcomes and create room for informed disagreement among forecasters.\n\nKey terms and links for reference:\n- Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulated_cyclone_energy \n- NHC North Atlantic Summary (Total ACE shown): https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/?text \n- 2025 Atlantic hurricane season overview (context): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Atlantic_hurricane_season \n- CSU Real-Time North Atlantic statistics (backup/cross-check): https://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/Realtime/index.php?loc=northatlantic\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"4207aa0e604bca06\"}}`" }, { "id": 40648, "title": "Will the NY Supreme Court (NY County) issue a written order adjudicating any part of the parties’ May 2025 summary judgment motions in Smartmatic v. Fox between Oct 15 and Dec 31, 2025?", "short_title": "Will the NY Supreme Court (NY County) issue a written order adjudicating any part of the parties’ Ma", "url_title": "Will the NY Supreme Court (NY County) issue a written order adjudicating any part of the parties’ Ma", "slug": "will-the-ny-supreme-court-ny-county-issue-a-written-order-adjudicating-any-part-of-the-parties-ma", "author_id": 276265, "author_username": "AutoQuestionsBot", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:09.950003Z", "published_at": "2025-11-14T11:08:21Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-14T12:39:00.275625Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:10.159831Z", "comment_count": 0, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2025-11-14T12:38:21Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-14T12:38:21Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2025-11-14T11:08:21Z", "nr_forecasters": 87, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "question_series": [ { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } ], "default_project": { "id": 32843, "type": "question_series", "name": "MiniBench - LLM Question Experiment - 2025-11-10", "slug": "minibench-2025-11-10", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": "1000.00", "start_date": "2025-11-10T05:00:00Z", "close_date": "2026-02-03T05:00:00Z", "forecasting_end_date": "2025-11-23T22:36:46Z", "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2025-11-07T04:36:56.860004Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-22T06:34:25.508403Z", "score_type": "spot_peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "unlisted", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "include" } }, "question": { "id": 40244, "title": "Will the NY Supreme Court (NY County) issue a written order adjudicating any part of the parties’ May 2025 summary judgment motions in Smartmatic v. Fox between Oct 15 and Dec 31, 2025?", "created_at": "2025-11-08T04:15:09.950418Z", "open_time": "2025-11-14T11:08:21Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2025-11-14T12:38:21Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2025-11-14T12:38:21Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2025-11-14T12:38:21Z", "actual_close_time": "2025-11-14T12:38:21Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": null, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": true, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "spot_peer", "default_aggregation_method": "unweighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": false, "open_lower_bound": false, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "Case overview and posture (as of 2025-10-01):\n- On May 1, 2025, both Smartmatic and Fox filed dueling motions for summary judgment in the New York defamation litigation arising from Fox’s coverage of the 2020 U.S. election. Smartmatic’s filings and subsequent reporting note that the filings were heavily redacted. No decision timetable was indicated in those reports.\n- On January 9, 2025, the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed that Smartmatic’s direct-liability defamation claim against Fox Corporation could proceed, while dismissing the vicarious liability theory against Fox Corporation; the matter originates in Supreme Court, New York County, Index No. 151136/21 (Justice David B. Cohen).\n- On May 14, 2025, a New York appeals court ruled that Fox News could access disputed documents related to a federal bribery indictment of senior Smartmatic executives, a procedural win for Fox’s defense arguments.\n- Smartmatic’s public “Lawsuit Updates” page indicates additional 2025 activity, including a May 14, 2025 spoliation motion and an August 29, 2025 filing urging the trial court to set a trial date; it also notes that discovery closed on January 29, 2025.\n\nKey definitions and sources relevant to resolution:\n- New York Supreme Court (New York County): In New York, the “Supreme Court” is the state’s trial-level court of general jurisdiction; the New York County Supreme Court is part of this system.\n- Summary judgment: A court decision for one party without a full trial when there’s no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; may be granted or denied in whole or in part.\n- NYSCEF: The New York State Courts Electronic Filing system is the official platform for e-filing and for accessing docket entries in Supreme Court cases, including New York County.\n- Time zone: Eastern Time (ET) includes Eastern Daylight Time (UTC−4) and Eastern Standard Time (UTC−5); New York observes ET.\n\nWhy this is forecastable now: The cross-motions for summary judgment were filed in early May 2025, are significant milestones prior to any trial, and remained pending as of late summer 2025 according to party updates, with no public decision timeline given. Whether the trial court will issue any adjudicative order on those motions by year-end 2025 is uncertain and depends on judicial scheduling and case developments.\n\nPointers to find the resolution quickly:\n- Official docket: NYSCEF public portal (iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef). Search for Index No. 151136/2021 and check for any “Decision + Order on Motion” or similar orders filed/entered within the window.\n- Media coverage (if needed): Major outlets covering the case have included ABC, CNN, and The Washington Post (for filings context).\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"eb8355dd354b03c7\"}}`", "resolution_criteria": "Question: Will the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York (trial-level court) issue a written order adjudicating any portion of the parties’ summary judgment motions in Smartmatic USA Corp. v. Fox News Network, LLC et al. (Index No. 151136/2021) between 00:00 ET on October 15, 2025 and 23:59 ET on December 31, 2025?\n\nDefinitions and scope:\n- Court: “Supreme Court (New York County)” refers to the New York State Supreme Court, trial level, in New York County.\n- Case identification: Smartmatic USA Corp. v. Fox News Network, LLC et al., Index No. 151136/2021; related pleadings and motions in this index are within scope.\n- Summary judgment motion: A motion asking the court to resolve claims without trial; it can be granted or denied, in whole or in part. For this question, “the parties’ summary judgment motions” refers to the cross-motions for summary judgment filed by Smartmatic and by the Fox defendants in late April/early May 2025, including Smartmatic’s filing noted on April 30, 2025 and media-reported dueling motions on May 1, 2025.\n- Written order adjudicating any portion: A written, judge-signed “Decision and Order,” “Decision + Order on Motion,” or “Order” that grants or denies (in whole or in part) relief sought by either party’s May 2025 summary judgment motion(s). Orders limited solely to administrative matters (e.g., sealing/redaction, scheduling/adjournments, discovery or spoliation disputes, page limits, or briefing schedules) do not count unless they expressly grant or deny summary judgment relief on the merits.\n\nTiming and timestamp:\n- Time window: From 00:00 ET on October 15, 2025 through 23:59 ET on December 31, 2025.\n- Determinative timestamp: The date and time reflected on the NYSCEF docket entry for the qualifying order controls. If a PDF header (“FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK …”) shows a different file-time than the docket entry, use the docket entry’s timestamp.\n\nResolution criteria:\n- Resolves Yes if, within the time window, the NYSCEF docket for Index No. 151136/2021 shows any qualifying written order adjudicating any portion of either side’s May 2025 summary judgment motion(s) (granting or denying, in whole or in part). \n- Resolves No if no such order is docketed within the time window. A settlement, withdrawal, or other non-merits disposition without a summary-judgment ruling during the window yields No.\n\nPrimary resolution source:\n- NYSCEF public docket for Index No. 151136/2021 (via iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef). If NYSCEF is inaccessible or ambiguous, rely on credible reporting by major outlets (e.g., AP, Reuters, NYT) clearly describing a qualifying order, provided the order’s filing/entry time falls within the window.\n\nEdge cases:\n- If the court issues an order that “reserves decision,” requests supplemental submissions, or states that decision is forthcoming without granting/denying summary judgment, it does not count.\n- If multiple orders are issued, any one qualifying order within the window triggers a Yes.\n- If the order is signed before the window but entered on NYSCEF within the window, use the NYSCEF entry timestamp (counts as Yes). If signed within the window but entered after the window, it does not count.\n\nNotes for forecasters (context only):\n- Dueling summary judgment motions were filed on/around May 1, 2025, with heavy redactions and no stated decision timeline.\n- The Appellate Division’s January 9, 2025 decision permitted Smartmatic’s direct-liability claim against Fox Corp. to proceed while dismissing vicarious liability, keeping core merits issues active for trial-level adjudication.\n- Subsequent developments in May–August 2025 included Fox gaining access to certain disputed documents and Smartmatic filing a spoliation motion and pressing for a trial date, underscoring continued pretrial activity without a publicly known ruling date.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 40648, "aggregations": { "unweighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763123330.157936, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.3 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.41 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763123330.157936, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 87, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.3 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.41 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.65, 0.35 ], "means": [ 0.38280076628352494 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 8.0, 1.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.0, 11.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.0, 19.0, 2.0, 0.0, 4.0, 0.0, 8.0, 1.0, 2.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.0, 0.0, 0.0, 2.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 0, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 90, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Case overview and posture (as of 2025-10-01):\n- On May 1, 2025, both Smartmatic and Fox filed dueling motions for summary judgment in the New York defamation litigation arising from Fox’s coverage of the 2020 U.S. election. Smartmatic’s filings and subsequent reporting note that the filings were heavily redacted. No decision timetable was indicated in those reports.\n- On January 9, 2025, the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed that Smartmatic’s direct-liability defamation claim against Fox Corporation could proceed, while dismissing the vicarious liability theory against Fox Corporation; the matter originates in Supreme Court, New York County, Index No. 151136/21 (Justice David B. Cohen).\n- On May 14, 2025, a New York appeals court ruled that Fox News could access disputed documents related to a federal bribery indictment of senior Smartmatic executives, a procedural win for Fox’s defense arguments.\n- Smartmatic’s public “Lawsuit Updates” page indicates additional 2025 activity, including a May 14, 2025 spoliation motion and an August 29, 2025 filing urging the trial court to set a trial date; it also notes that discovery closed on January 29, 2025.\n\nKey definitions and sources relevant to resolution:\n- New York Supreme Court (New York County): In New York, the “Supreme Court” is the state’s trial-level court of general jurisdiction; the New York County Supreme Court is part of this system.\n- Summary judgment: A court decision for one party without a full trial when there’s no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; may be granted or denied in whole or in part.\n- NYSCEF: The New York State Courts Electronic Filing system is the official platform for e-filing and for accessing docket entries in Supreme Court cases, including New York County.\n- Time zone: Eastern Time (ET) includes Eastern Daylight Time (UTC−4) and Eastern Standard Time (UTC−5); New York observes ET.\n\nWhy this is forecastable now: The cross-motions for summary judgment were filed in early May 2025, are significant milestones prior to any trial, and remained pending as of late summer 2025 according to party updates, with no public decision timeline given. Whether the trial court will issue any adjudicative order on those motions by year-end 2025 is uncertain and depends on judicial scheduling and case developments.\n\nPointers to find the resolution quickly:\n- Official docket: NYSCEF public portal (iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef). Search for Index No. 151136/2021 and check for any “Decision + Order on Motion” or similar orders filed/entered within the window.\n- Media coverage (if needed): Major outlets covering the case have included ABC, CNN, and The Washington Post (for filings context).\n\n`{\"format\":\"csv_table\",\"info\":{\"hash_id\":\"eb8355dd354b03c7\"}}`" } ] }