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=5820
{ "count": 6412, "next": "http://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/?format=api&limit=20&offset=5840", "previous": "http://www.metaculus.com/api2/questions/?format=api&limit=20&offset=5800", "results": [ { "id": 1536, "title": "Will a third LIGO detector be built in India before 2028?", "short_title": "Indian LIGO Detector by 2028", "url_title": "Indian LIGO Detector by 2028", "slug": "indian-ligo-detector-by-2028", "author_id": 103275, "author_username": "christian", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-26T02:10:29.064133Z", "published_at": "2018-11-08T05:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-20T07:52:09.164316Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-11-08T05:00:00Z", "comment_count": 4, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2028-01-01T05:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2028-01-01T05:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-11-08T05:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 81, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3699, "name": "Natural Sciences", "slug": "natural-sciences", "emoji": "🔬", "description": "Natural Sciences", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3695, "name": "Space", "slug": "space", "emoji": "🚀", "description": "Space", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1536, "title": "Will a third LIGO detector be built in India before 2028?", "created_at": "2018-10-26T02:10:29.064133Z", "open_time": "2018-11-08T05:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-11-10T05:00:00Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-11-10T05:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2028-01-01T05:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2028-01-01T05:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2028-01-01T05:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "The [Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory](https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/) (LIGO) has been responsible for some tremendously exciting science this decade.\n\n* On [September 14, 2015](https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/news/ligo20160211), LIGO detected (through gravitational waves) the merger of two black holes billions of light years away.\n* This triumph opened a new era of [gravitational wave astronomy](https://www.space.com/39162-gravitational-waves-new-era-of-astronomy-2017.html), giving us a radical new tool to probe the cosmos.\n* LIGO and friends (like VIRGO in Europe) have since seen other black hole mash-ups and even, amazingly, the smashing of [2 neutron stars](https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/16/557557544/astronomers-strike-gravitational-gold-in-colliding-neutron-stars).\n* The engineering required to make this observatory hop is [just ridiculous](http://www.kavlifoundation.org/how-ligo-works).\n\nHowever, per astrophysicist Ethan Siegel, LIGO [misses ~100,000 black hole mergers every year](https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/ligo-misses-100-000-black-hole-mergers-a-year-d3184f5d193a). Whoa! \n\nWe need backup, apparently!\n\nWell, help may soon be on the way, in the form of another LIGO detector under construction in India. [LIGO-India](http://www.gw-indigo.org/tiki-index.php?page=LIGO-India) \"is a planned advanced gravitational-wave observatory to be located in India as part of the worldwide network.\" Possible benefits include:\n\n> Adding a new detector to the existing network will increase the expected event rates, and will boost the detection confidence of new sources (by increasing the sensitivity, sky coverage and duty cycle of the network). But the dramatic improvement from LIGO-India would come in the ability of localizing GW sources in the sky. Sky-location of the GW sources is computed by combining data from geographically separated detectors ('aperture synthesis'). Adding a new detector in India, geographically well separated from the existing LIGO-Virgo detector array, will dramatically improve the source-localization accuracies (5 to 10 times), thus enabling us to use GW observations as an excellent astronomical tool.\n\nLIGO-India is set to be built [by 2025](https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/a-new-ligo-gravitational-wave-detector-to-be-built-in-india-by-2025/article22149855.ece). That's 2 years before our question's deadline. But delays on massive science projects happen with some frequency. (Ahem, [Elon Musk](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2018/06/06/elon-musk-has-been-missing-deadlines-since-he-was-a-kid/). Ahem, [James Webb Telescope](https://www.space.com/41016-nasa-delays-james-webb-space-telescope-2021.html).)", "resolution_criteria": "This question will resolve as **Yes** if LIGO-India's observatory becomes operational (defined taking test data demonstrating a sensitivity within a factor of 10 of the instrument's specified sensitivity) at any point before January 1, 2028", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1536, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1762276452.224567, "end_time": 1764486238.709683, "forecaster_count": 55, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.05 ], "centers": [ 0.07 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.3 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1762276452.224567, "end_time": 1764486238.709683, "forecaster_count": 55, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.05 ], "centers": [ 0.07 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.3 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.9299999999999999, 0.07 ], "means": [ 0.17116431460030884 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.6138557846642979, 0.8145691660186479, 1.6942602510936153, 0.0, 0.0, 2.7943564318009235, 0.7081278126566147, 0.6595493454573285, 0.0, 0.0, 1.1357064675968473, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.01420841581464255, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.16311084500120132, 0.0, 0.0, 0.24263464463183257, 0.0, 0.4342156969849834, 0.0, 0.4236871445251884, 0.10860410592794534, 0.0, 0.02892019494468926, 0.0, 0.041854423028354265, 0.0, 0.002473836920010813, 0.26357008825228284, 0.06549491799116114, 0.0, 0.0, 0.1879393751887922, 0.39526139665386184, 0.0, 0.0, 0.21186329816682795, 0.08068367621686655, 0.5305229787824769, 0.010175510648281665, 0.0, 0.30999457281726844, 0.0, 0.0692311375742478, 0.0, 0.01921436943183433, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.003399429418515302, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.07277615171478852, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.08926029747599007, 0.008476588784980537, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.05879944916051883, 0.0016348593756712248, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.03283702835426392, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.047494890062066114 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728288135.99063, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 80, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728288135.99063, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 80, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.8861579217895311, 0.11384207821046886 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 10, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 234, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "The [Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory](https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/) (LIGO) has been responsible for some tremendously exciting science this decade.\n\n* On [September 14, 2015](https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/news/ligo20160211), LIGO detected (through gravitational waves) the merger of two black holes billions of light years away.\n* This triumph opened a new era of [gravitational wave astronomy](https://www.space.com/39162-gravitational-waves-new-era-of-astronomy-2017.html), giving us a radical new tool to probe the cosmos.\n* LIGO and friends (like VIRGO in Europe) have since seen other black hole mash-ups and even, amazingly, the smashing of [2 neutron stars](https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/16/557557544/astronomers-strike-gravitational-gold-in-colliding-neutron-stars).\n* The engineering required to make this observatory hop is [just ridiculous](http://www.kavlifoundation.org/how-ligo-works).\n\nHowever, per astrophysicist Ethan Siegel, LIGO [misses ~100,000 black hole mergers every year](https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/ligo-misses-100-000-black-hole-mergers-a-year-d3184f5d193a). Whoa! \n\nWe need backup, apparently!\n\nWell, help may soon be on the way, in the form of another LIGO detector under construction in India. [LIGO-India](http://www.gw-indigo.org/tiki-index.php?page=LIGO-India) \"is a planned advanced gravitational-wave observatory to be located in India as part of the worldwide network.\" Possible benefits include:\n\n> Adding a new detector to the existing network will increase the expected event rates, and will boost the detection confidence of new sources (by increasing the sensitivity, sky coverage and duty cycle of the network). But the dramatic improvement from LIGO-India would come in the ability of localizing GW sources in the sky. Sky-location of the GW sources is computed by combining data from geographically separated detectors ('aperture synthesis'). Adding a new detector in India, geographically well separated from the existing LIGO-Virgo detector array, will dramatically improve the source-localization accuracies (5 to 10 times), thus enabling us to use GW observations as an excellent astronomical tool.\n\nLIGO-India is set to be built [by 2025](https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/a-new-ligo-gravitational-wave-detector-to-be-built-in-india-by-2025/article22149855.ece). That's 2 years before our question's deadline. But delays on massive science projects happen with some frequency. (Ahem, [Elon Musk](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2018/06/06/elon-musk-has-been-missing-deadlines-since-he-was-a-kid/). Ahem, [James Webb Telescope](https://www.space.com/41016-nasa-delays-james-webb-space-telescope-2021.html).)" }, { "id": 1535, "title": "Will most protons that currently make up Earth (and you) eventually decay?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-most-protons-that-currently-make-up-earth-and-you-eventually-decay", "author_id": 103275, "author_username": "christian", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-26T01:50:37.204271Z", "published_at": "2018-11-02T04:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-10-19T21:23:43.702981Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-11-02T04:00:00Z", "comment_count": 4, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "9999-01-01T05:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "9999-01-01T05:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-11-02T04:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 59, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3699, "name": "Natural Sciences", "slug": "natural-sciences", "emoji": "🔬", "description": "Natural Sciences", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1535, "title": "Will most protons that currently make up Earth (and you) eventually decay?", "created_at": "2018-10-26T01:50:37.204271Z", "open_time": "2018-11-02T04:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-11-04T04:00:00Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-11-04T04:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "9999-01-01T05:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "9999-01-01T05:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "9999-01-01T05:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "*Warning: This is one of those Metaculus questions with no points actually on the line. It's not going to resolve.*\n\nWhat is the ultimate fate of the \"stuff\" that makes us up? It's mostly protons, which (fortunately) are remarkably durable.\n\nAfter we as individuals die, the material that comprises our bodies at the time of death will mostly likely get recycled into Earth's biosphere. (This isn't 100% guaranteed--some lucky few of us may get to [die on Mars](https://www.popsci.com/how-youll-die-mars).) And not ALL of the protons in our bodies will remain on Earth. By chance, some will escape into space and roam the void.\n\nBut what's the *long* long term fate of the protons of Earth? Perhaps the Earth will be swallowed by the sun in a few billion years. [Or maybe not](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-sun-will-eventually-engulf-earth-maybe/). But on much longer time scales, many interesting things can happen to our protons:\n\n* We could end up sucked into the black hole at the center of our galaxy if the Andromeda-Milky Way [galactic merger](http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/03/24/scientists-predict-our-galaxys-death/) happens just so. Or another black hole could happen along.\n\n* A [vacuum state change](https://nerdist.com/vacuum-decay-is-a-very-real-way-all-life-in-the-universe-might-be-destroyed/) or other weird physics could end the universe as we know it.\n\n* Protons might [not actually decay](https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/do-protons-decay), and just hang around forever.\n\nWhat do you think will happen to our remnants in super-deep time? \n\nQuestion \"resolves\" positive if most of Earth's protons eventually decay into lighter particles; resolves negative if the majority of Earth's protons have a different fate (are processed into net zero-baryon number black hole emissions, destroyed in a phase transition, sit around forever, recast into other particles by superintelligent beings, disappear when the simulation's plug is pulled, or whatever.)", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1535, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1760909013.344952, "end_time": 1855603413.305, "forecaster_count": 59, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.2 ], "centers": [ 0.4443934260525044 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.67 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1760909013.344952, "end_time": 1855603413.305, "forecaster_count": 59, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.2 ], "centers": [ 0.4443934260525044 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.67 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.5556065739474956, 0.4443934260525044 ], "means": [ 0.4378710462309207 ], "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728290050.702279, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 58, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728290050.702279, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 58, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.6444676536879431, 0.3555323463120569 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 6, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 106, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1534, "title": "Will the incarceration rate in the US drop below 500 per 100,000 by 2022?", "short_title": "US Incarceration Rate Drops by 2022?", "url_title": "US Incarceration Rate Drops by 2022?", "slug": "us-incarceration-rate-drops-by-2022", "author_id": 103275, "author_username": "christian", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-25T20:28:05.679136Z", "published_at": "2018-11-15T05:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:08.478909Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-11-15T05:00:00Z", "comment_count": 8, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2019-03-01T05:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-03-01T05:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2024-08-30T15:20:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2024-08-30T15:20:00Z", "open_time": "2018-11-15T05:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 46, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32602, "name": "2016-2025 Leaderboard", "slug": "2016_2025_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "category": [ { "id": 3688, "name": "Law", "slug": "law", "emoji": "⚖️", "description": "Law", "type": "category" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } }, "question": { "id": 1534, "title": "Will the incarceration rate in the US drop below 500 per 100,000 by 2022?", "created_at": "2018-10-25T20:28:05.679136Z", "open_time": "2018-11-15T05:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-11-16T07:03:29.730226Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-11-16T07:03:29.730226Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2024-08-30T15:20:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2024-08-30T15:20:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2024-08-30T15:20:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-03-01T05:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2019-03-01T05:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "no", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "In [April 2018](https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus16.pdf) the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reported that the incarcerated US population has continued to decrease. This population includes offenders under the jurisdiction of state or federal prisons or held in local jails. For 2016, the incarceration rate for all ages is 670 out of 100,000 US residents. (If you are interested in a world-wide comparison please see the [World Prison Brief](http://www.prisonstudies.org/)) \n \nCurrently the incarceration rate is at its lowest since 1993 and has been decreasing since reaching a peak in 2009. [Incarceration Rate, 1980-2016](https://www.bjs.gov/content/keystatistics/images/7_Incarceration_rate_1980_2016.png)\n\nWill the rate in the US drop below 500 per 100,000 by 2022 (all ages)? Note that the last time the rate was this low was in 1991.", "resolution_criteria": "***Question resolves as affirmative if the incarceration rate, as reported by the BJS, drops below 500 per 100,000 for at least one year within 2019-2022.***", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1534, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1551413350.756911, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 46, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.17 ], "centers": [ 0.25 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.33 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1551413350.756911, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 46, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.17 ], "centers": [ 0.25 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.33 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.75, 0.25 ], "means": [ 0.2706522377736761 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.3862084272492791, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.11083038735431396, 0.7404867752757096, 0.5843051095475567, 0.32449805599287956, 0.27114422392158133, 0.4573391763706963, 0.8280996768030725, 0.13717490894663273, 0.8614998454466418, 0.12061073836995856, 0.0, 1.00693359837883, 0.3542447088992047, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.6507017553625043, 0.0, 0.0, 0.5521968950243368, 0.42052548288015196, 0.0, 0.031250959703169254, 0.12345059748575654, 0.7986028953533055, 0.0, 0.0, 0.22518626811013776, 0.0, 0.03621693803772868, 0.004662905996750363, 0.18575801079970408, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.4520036114744225, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.061894126969327355, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.022769576841270445, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.02678127518047141, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.29683892709897775 ] ] }, "score_data": { "peer_score": 15.925725793538627, "coverage": 0.9999050643725891, "baseline_score": 52.66776317793857, "spot_peer_score": 5.806644735005332, "peer_archived_score": 15.925725793538627, "baseline_archived_score": 52.66776317793857, "spot_peer_archived_score": 5.806644735005332 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1550923002.629921, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 45, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1550923002.629921, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 45, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.7960169845582085, 0.20398301544179154 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 9, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 76, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "In [April 2018](https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus16.pdf) the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reported that the incarcerated US population has continued to decrease. This population includes offenders under the jurisdiction of state or federal prisons or held in local jails. For 2016, the incarceration rate for all ages is 670 out of 100,000 US residents. (If you are interested in a world-wide comparison please see the [World Prison Brief](http://www.prisonstudies.org/)) \n \nCurrently the incarceration rate is at its lowest since 1993 and has been decreasing since reaching a peak in 2009. [Incarceration Rate, 1980-2016](https://www.bjs.gov/content/keystatistics/images/7_Incarceration_rate_1980_2016.png)\n\nWill the rate in the US drop below 500 per 100,000 by 2022 (all ages)? Note that the last time the rate was this low was in 1991." }, { "id": 1533, "title": "Will Tesla deliver first $35,000 Model 3 in 2019?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-tesla-deliver-first-35000-model-3-in-2019", "author_id": 103304, "author_username": "isinlor", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-25T19:27:13.599143Z", "published_at": "2018-12-29T08:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:28:56.906752Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-12-29T08:00:00Z", "comment_count": 65, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2019-02-27T23:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-02-27T23:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2019-04-19T15:05:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2019-04-19T15:05:00Z", "open_time": "2018-12-29T08:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 75, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32606, "name": "2018-2019 Leaderboard", "slug": "2018_2019_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3701, "name": "Technology", "slug": "technology", "emoji": "⚙️", "description": "Technology", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1533, "title": "Will Tesla deliver first $35,000 Model 3 in 2019?", "created_at": "2018-10-25T19:27:13.599143Z", "open_time": "2018-12-29T08:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-12-30T08:55:17.878341Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-12-30T08:55:17.878341Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2019-04-19T15:05:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2019-04-19T15:05:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2019-04-19T15:05:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-02-27T23:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2019-02-27T23:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "yes", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "When [unveiling Model 3 in 2016](https://youtu.be/Q4VGQPk2Dl8?t=1037) Musk was promising \"well of course it'll be $35,000\", but since then Tesla has struggled to deliver. \n\nRecently, [during the conference call for Tesla’s third quarter financial results](https://youtu.be/v0U7orfKEhM?t=2341) Musk was saying:\n> If we could produce a $35,000 car today, we would do it. We need more work, there is more work to do before in order to make a $35,000 car and have it be positive gross margin. We’re probably less than six months from that. That’s our mission.\n\nThe same sentiment was reiterated in the \"[Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update](http://ir.teslamotors.com/static-files/725970e6-eda5-47ab-96e1-422d4045f799)\" document.\n\nWe all know that Musk time works differently, probably already in Martian Years, so the question asks:\n\n### Will Tesla deliver first new $35,000 Model 3 in 2019?\n\nIn order for this question to resolve positively there needs to be a report that the first $35,000 Model 3 was deliver to a customer before midnight of the last day of 2019. The car must be new and the price reported on tesla.com for United States must be $35,000 or less before savings. In other words the price must not include potential incentives and gas savings. [See the screenshot.](https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/d173b600-31c5-47a3-8a9a-1198e14ed368.png)", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1533, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1551281242.784569, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 74, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.33 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1551281242.784569, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 74, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.33 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.65, 0.35 ], "means": [ 0.35145916273130123 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.21942355072478695, 0.0, 0.09467292063321112, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0010381920838562959, 0.4827205360804419, 0.0, 0.006759718771926677, 0.0, 0.8788418448758459, 0.0, 0.02000227009300229, 0.4721503302971762, 0.63020946265957, 0.9245796033595346, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.11206883216739572, 0.0, 0.0, 2.1254793646303027, 0.0021274407994285806, 2.664179279274858, 0.0625760055549752, 0.0, 0.4529037759716625, 0.0, 3.392761082548598, 0.0, 0.027260261306647233, 1.6451469776493737, 0.35078577704478453, 0.5474047403862159, 0.031058253918708402, 0.0043392766864219865, 0.0, 0.03268648915735988, 0.016079834428119808, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.003689275185039177, 0.0031076199278334622, 0.09052328616782597, 0.0004992891021050837, 0.0, 0.0, 0.029188163670837604, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.02464094517995897, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.23556847828102762, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.014358311246418655, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.11089172218023127 ] ] }, "score_data": { "peer_score": 4.281940199193731, "coverage": 0.9988802781548372, "baseline_score": -31.29123882116245, "spot_peer_score": 0.7334157994742907, "peer_archived_score": 4.281940199193731, "baseline_archived_score": -31.29123882116245, "spot_peer_archived_score": 0.7334157994742907 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1551219298.029804, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 70, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1551219298.029804, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 70, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.7391171467424544, 0.26088285325754557 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 7, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 128, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1531, "title": "Will the INF treaty functionally continue past 2025?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-the-inf-treaty-functionally-continue-past-2025", "author_id": 106635, "author_username": "Pshyeah", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-24T10:20:58.676897Z", "published_at": "2018-10-29T11:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:20.385130Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-29T11:00:00Z", "comment_count": 41, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2019-02-01T21:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-07-15T22:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2019-07-15T22:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2019-02-01T21:00:00Z", "open_time": "2018-10-29T11:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 30, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32606, "name": "2018-2019 Leaderboard", "slug": "2018_2019_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3689, "name": "Politics", "slug": "politics", "emoji": "🏛️", "description": "Politics", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1531, "title": "Will the INF treaty functionally continue past 2025?", "created_at": "2018-10-24T10:20:58.676897Z", "open_time": "2018-10-29T11:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-31T11:00:00Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-31T11:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2019-07-15T22:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2019-02-01T21:00:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2019-02-01T21:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-07-15T22:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2019-02-01T21:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "no", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "The [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty](http://templatelab.com/intermediate-range-nuclear-forces-treaty/) was one of the most successful arms control agreements in recent history. Signed in 1987 by President Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev, the treaty called for disarmament of all nuclear and conventional missiles and their launchers with ranges between 500–5,500 km (310–3,420 mi), excluding sea-launched missiles.\n\nAfter 20 years, both signatories started to allege the other was violating the treaty. Russia supposedly by developing the SSC-8 cruise missile, and the US by opening bases in Rumania and Poland. The US' increased use of armed drones is also claimed to be in violation of the treaty.\n\nIn late 2018 [President Trump declared his intention to withdraw from the treaty](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-nuclear-trump/trump-u-s-to-exit-nuclear-treaty-citing-russian-violations-idUSKCN1MU0Z8), citing both Russia's violation and China's arms build-up.\n\nThus we wonder: **Will the INF treaty *functionally* continue past 2025?**\n\nKeep in mind, expanding the treaty to include more signatories, or having it replaced with a slightly different treaty (à la [NAFTA turned USMCA](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/573/the-end-of-nafta/)) would still be interpreted as *functionally continuing*.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1531, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1563367042.323351, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 63, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.04 ], "centers": [ 0.12 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.28 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1563367042.323351, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 63, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.04 ], "centers": [ 0.12 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.28 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.88, 0.12 ], "means": [ 0.18158866442162178 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 1.4692860345354708, 0.9387124664479816, 0.5938933945991016, 0.8258953232607744, 0.6294919574179565, 0.10224333355391588, 0.8675866763126727, 0.30843325655769926, 0.12168712976649625, 0.6547129229298452, 0.45120860633737064, 0.28146589476722067, 0.03492060446249783, 0.4205524304686736, 0.39887627205738896, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.14507004493205528, 0.0, 0.5183295490595771, 0.15653253442693307, 1.0, 0.6788062773671363, 0.0, 0.0, 0.27144266175998527, 0.0, 0.32112466647930465, 0.0, 0.8807299230690194, 0.981737132763533, 0.0, 0.3704891011963354, 0.07095202666684558, 0.001469195406109808, 0.0, 0.07029333138308508, 0.008438284300033617, 0.0, 0.0, 0.015061754745690714, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.002018898677062105, 0.41763147408176937, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.017175512748169287, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.005034190088132767, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.009846599194668917, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.33905283347288273, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": { "peer_score": 0.8111101496628567, "coverage": 0.36754455901214544, "baseline_score": 7.264004760084348, "spot_peer_score": -3.469184737195791, "peer_archived_score": 0.8111101496628567, "baseline_archived_score": 7.264004760084348, "spot_peer_archived_score": -3.469184737195791 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1549025230.587975, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 28, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1549025230.587975, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 28, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.7530001080282187, 0.24699989197178132 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 3, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 48, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1529, "title": "Will China launch an \"artificial moon\" by 2025?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-china-launch-an-artificial-moon-by-2025", "author_id": 100014, "author_username": "converse", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-21T23:07:57.561176Z", "published_at": "2018-10-24T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:08.362259Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-24T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 3, "status": "closed", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": "2019-07-21T19:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-07-21T19:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-15T20:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-10-24T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 80, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32606, "name": "2018-2019 Leaderboard", "slug": "2018_2019_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3698, "name": "Economy & Business", "slug": "economy-business", "emoji": "💼", "description": "Economy & Business", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3701, "name": "Technology", "slug": "technology", "emoji": "⚙️", "description": "Technology", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1529, "title": "Will China launch an \"artificial moon\" by 2025?", "created_at": "2018-10-21T23:07:57.561176Z", "open_time": "2018-10-24T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-25T05:48:24.618688Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-25T05:48:24.618688Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2026-01-15T20:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2019-07-21T19:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2019-07-21T19:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "closed", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "As [reported here by Time](http://time.com/5429288/china-chengdu-artificial-moon/), China plans to launch a satellite by 2020 that will illuminate some of its cities by reflecting sunlight.\n\nThe claim in the article is that the satellite will be eight times as luminous as the actual Moon (when viewed from an appropriate location) and will provide about a fifth of the light level normally provided by streetlights.\n\nLet's relax both the date and the luminosity requirements. *This question will resolve positively if by the year 2025 China has launched a reflecting satellite that is both more than twice as luminous as the full Moon when seen from a major Chinese city and provides more than 10% of the illuminating power that is seen from streetlights on a street in that same city.* The luminosity requirements can be met by aggregate contribution of multiple satellites, if they are all launched by China. \n\nResolution will be by credible media report in a media outlet outside of China. \"Major Chinese city\" will be taken to mean one of the top 20 cities in China by population (which list currently includes Chengdu, listed as the target city by the article linked above).", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1529, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1563706975.8742, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 79, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.09 ], "centers": [ 0.12 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.24 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1563706975.8742, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 79, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.09 ], "centers": [ 0.12 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.24 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.88, 0.12 ], "means": [ 0.16484552174601644 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 1.215878362099746, 0.0, 0.000780056964336447, 0.07113353320870651, 1.1738375433768544, 0.0, 1.2642366313370006, 0.17433684005092911, 1.0010197534288652, 1.486481287915474, 0.7513609248868253, 1.6130827056974444, 0.016699727217022405, 0.0, 0.9478495677252194, 0.0, 0.09722222970319579, 0.7087937680403422, 0.03950452060911081, 0.7152049943101007, 0.25274276842661425, 0.6683702162141048, 0.0, 0.34029419999880384, 0.002334944183173679, 0.0, 0.38637747064730565, 0.8433303443076081, 0.0, 0.9602513401621613, 0.0, 0.4625463126360254, 0.14085966230613312, 0.0, 0.020482295148019, 0.0, 0.015028924156914286, 0.0361372874092818, 0.0, 0.22946702763934312, 0.0, 0.0, 0.08331970693963144, 0.008522131514278471, 0.0, 0.0, 0.28015246351522516, 0.0, 0.0, 0.24579817309181154, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.02781081063230008 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1563545550.756968, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 77, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1563545550.756968, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 77, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.8885069420648178, 0.1114930579351822 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 11, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 124, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1518, "title": "Will the Hubble Telescope resume operations in its three-gyro configuration before the end of 2018?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-the-hubble-telescope-resume-operations-in-its-three-gyro-configuration-before-the-end-of-2018", "author_id": 103275, "author_username": "christian", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-19T13:56:27.469213Z", "published_at": "2018-10-21T16:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:23.423463Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-21T16:00:00Z", "comment_count": 5, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2018-10-27T00:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2018-11-01T04:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2018-11-01T04:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2018-10-27T00:00:00Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T16:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 42, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32599, "name": "2018 Leaderboard", "slug": "2018_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3699, "name": "Natural Sciences", "slug": "natural-sciences", "emoji": "🔬", "description": "Natural Sciences", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3701, "name": "Technology", "slug": "technology", "emoji": "⚙️", "description": "Technology", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3695, "name": "Space", "slug": "space", "emoji": "🚀", "description": "Space", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1518, "title": "Will the Hubble Telescope resume operations in its three-gyro configuration before the end of 2018?", "created_at": "2018-10-19T13:56:27.469213Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T16:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-22T03:38:51.293141Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-22T03:38:51.293141Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2018-11-01T04:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2018-10-27T00:00:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2018-10-27T00:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2018-11-01T04:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2018-10-27T00:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "yes", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "On Friday, October 5th the Hubble Telescope was placed in Safe Mode because one of the gyroscopes it uses to direct and stabilize its movement failed. This was not unexpected as this particular gyro had been exhibiting end-of-life behavior for the past year. Two similar gyros have already failed. Back in 2009 six new gyroscopes were installed, and the remaining three are enhanced. An Anomaly Review Board is currently investigating the issue.\n\nFrom [NASA](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/hubble-in-safe-mode-as-gyro-issues-are-diagnosed): \n\n>If the outcome indicates that the gyro is not usable, Hubble will resume science operations in an already defined “reduced-gyro” mode that uses only one gyro. While reduced-gyro mode offers less sky coverage at any particular time, there is relatively limited impact on the overall scientific capabilities.\n\nAs of question creation, the Hubble Telescope is still in Safe Mode. NASA seems confident that it will exit Safe Mode and resume scientific [operations soon](https://www.space.com/42063-hubble-telescope-malfunction-nasa-response.html). \n\n**Will the Hubble Telescope resume operations in its three-gyro configuration before the end of 2018?** \n \n*If the Hubble Telescope resumes three-gyro configuration for any duration of time and thereafter ceases that configuration—to enter reduced-gyro mode or for any other reason—the question still resolves positive. Note that the question resolves negative if the telescope resumes operations but is only in reduced-gyro mode through the end of 2018.*", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1518, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1540831578.857029, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 49, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.72 ], "centers": [ 0.88 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.99 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1540831578.857029, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 49, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.72 ], "centers": [ 0.88 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.99 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.12, 0.88 ], "means": [ 0.8333159428833463 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.1494220410952148, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.012852091876617526, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.008531995357508187, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.027220607681408243, 0.0, 0.338266843588547, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.03355904935421398, 0.16898029784875665, 0.46718197015166185, 0.04978706836786394, 0.0, 0.0, 0.3341105465274057, 0.6423888484513706, 0.16466410993500383, 0.0, 0.0, 0.6485920880829986, 0.0, 0.21810592821876404, 0.0, 0.0, 1.224501831662879, 0.0, 0.8655887224229246, 0.0, 0.0, 0.33951136045872243, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.022165921749368957, 0.9307200270794798, 0.0, 0.8043908332778769, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 5.056546340544173 ] ] }, "score_data": { "peer_score": 4.814542823672601, "coverage": 0.49854925089280866, "baseline_score": 16.360072621279176, "spot_peer_score": 17.13201971286153, "peer_archived_score": 4.814542823672601, "baseline_archived_score": 16.360072621279176, "spot_peer_archived_score": 17.13201971286153 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1540492470.463776, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 39, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1540492470.463776, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 39, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.38910262047244715, 0.6108973795275529 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 5, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 72, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1517, "title": "Will the identity of Bitcoin's founder, Satoshi Nakamoto, be revealed to the general public by 2025?", "short_title": "Bitcoin Founder Identity Confirmed by April 2025?", "url_title": "Bitcoin Founder Identity Confirmed by April 2025?", "slug": "bitcoin-founder-identity-confirmed-by-april-2025", "author_id": 8, "author_username": "Anthony", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-19T02:38:34.992994Z", "published_at": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:28:57.818738Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 52, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2024-06-15T07:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2024-06-15T07:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2025-04-06T13:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2025-04-06T19:08:00Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 392, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32602, "name": "2016-2025 Leaderboard", "slug": "2016_2025_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3698, "name": "Economy & Business", "slug": "economy-business", "emoji": "💼", "description": "Economy & Business", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3693, "name": "Cryptocurrencies", "slug": "cryptocurrencies", "emoji": "💰", "description": "Cryptocurrencies", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1517, "title": "Will the identity of Bitcoin's founder, Satoshi Nakamoto, be revealed to the general public by 2025?", "created_at": "2018-10-19T02:38:34.992994Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-22T15:42:48.676635Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-22T15:42:48.676635Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2025-04-06T13:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2025-04-06T19:08:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2025-04-06T19:14:43.394355Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2024-06-15T07:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2024-06-15T07:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "no", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "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": "Few anonymous people--save maybe [Banksy](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-story-behind-banksy-4310304/) and [Qanon](http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/12/qanon-4chan-the-storm-conspiracy-explained.html)--have generated as much press as \"Satoshi Nakamoto\", the maverick who developed bitcoin.\n\nHaven't heard of the man? Here's an executive summary per [The Economist](https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2018/09/01/satoshi-nakamoto-bitcoins-enigmatic-creator):\n\n> ON PAPER—or at least on the blockchain—Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the richest people on the planet.... But Mr Nakamoto, though actively involved with his brainchild in its early history, has been silent since 2011. An army of amateur detectives has been trying to work out who he really is, but there is frustratingly little to go on. While developing bitcoin he claimed to be male, in his late 30s and living in Japan, but even that information is suspect.\n\nWill we ever find out his true identity? Speculation abounds. (See [here](https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-we-will-ever-know-who-or-what-Satoshi-Nakamoto-is-How-many-people-right-now-would-know-the-true-identity-of-Satoshi-Nakamoto) and [here](https://coinsutra.com/satoshi-nakamoto-facts/) and [here](https://medium.com/cryptomuse/how-the-nsa-caught-satoshi-nakamoto-868affcef595).) As noted above, Nakamoto is estimated to have [more than a million bitcoins](https://coincentral.com/how-rich-is-satoshi-nakamoto-today/), mined very early on. So he'd be worth well over $10Bn at current prices (as of launch), perhaps more. If he hasn't lost his thumb drive.", "resolution_criteria": "Question resolves postive if Satoshi's true, corroborated identity is revealed to the world at large by April 5, 2025, [his birthday](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/229qvr/happy_birthday_satoshi_nakamoto/). (Or is it??)", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1517, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1718286168.477117, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 392, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.01 ], "centers": [ 0.01 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.03 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1718286168.477117, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 392, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.01 ], "centers": [ 0.01 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.03 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.99, 0.01 ], "means": [ 0.0282959003874516 ], "histogram": [ [ 6.336912275485662, 15.561622966809132, 5.6132211781902175, 2.0600637360572183, 0.16139413606692604, 3.8307986239335694, 1.4994669166312224, 0.682130105800341, 0.06843389974958555, 0.049992093886060296, 0.6931674145502142, 0.09411576728680948, 0.08787332699424513, 0.20614409971857953, 0.07603593765220122, 0.016451089917975413, 0.3328626853289942, 0.3781234154424761, 0.0050361518135366235, 0.0001238500924126434, 0.06580840469877824, 0.047426849416156824, 0.013044808512681881, 0.001114924349064063, 0.00042909024365532375, 0.053821361906906146, 0.024665906510772374, 0.0, 0.00031857591848915336, 0.0, 0.0004006060999854011, 3.217607203916309e-05, 8.232517411564587e-05, 9.080700043505413e-05, 1.2117785106306077e-07, 0.0008495463181346833, 0.0, 0.005127429451870984, 0.0, 1.3758968564619595e-07, 6.850187085980066e-09, 0.0, 0.0, 0.020383772657617247, 0.0, 4.550595941051964e-07, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0005477546230307807, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0060842524185982265, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 4.772133089630468e-05, 0.0, 0.06844347173158767, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.031465762316449326, 0.0, 0.0, 0.00588051124390917, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.453812810248412e-05, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 3.322669653330169e-05 ] ] }, "score_data": { "baseline_score": 86.57723951859657, "peer_score": 8.961479712947167, "coverage": 0.9999803203596201, "relative_legacy_score": 0.0, "weighted_coverage": 0.9999803203596201, "spot_peer_score": 2.9147041145674293, "spot_baseline_score": 71.36958148433591, "baseline_archived_score": 86.57723951859657, "peer_archived_score": 8.961479712947167, "relative_legacy_archived_score": 0.0, "spot_peer_archived_score": 2.9147041145674293, "spot_baseline_archived_score": 71.36958148433591 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1718351990.789609, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 392, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1718351990.789609, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 392, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.9989098129557988, 0.0010901870442011896 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 42, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 896, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "Few anonymous people--save maybe [Banksy](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-story-behind-banksy-4310304/) and [Qanon](http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/12/qanon-4chan-the-storm-conspiracy-explained.html)--have generated as much press as \"Satoshi Nakamoto\", the maverick who developed bitcoin.\n\nHaven't heard of the man? Here's an executive summary per [The Economist](https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2018/09/01/satoshi-nakamoto-bitcoins-enigmatic-creator):\n\n> ON PAPER—or at least on the blockchain—Satoshi Nakamoto is one of the richest people on the planet.... But Mr Nakamoto, though actively involved with his brainchild in its early history, has been silent since 2011. An army of amateur detectives has been trying to work out who he really is, but there is frustratingly little to go on. While developing bitcoin he claimed to be male, in his late 30s and living in Japan, but even that information is suspect.\n\nWill we ever find out his true identity? Speculation abounds. (See [here](https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-we-will-ever-know-who-or-what-Satoshi-Nakamoto-is-How-many-people-right-now-would-know-the-true-identity-of-Satoshi-Nakamoto) and [here](https://coinsutra.com/satoshi-nakamoto-facts/) and [here](https://medium.com/cryptomuse/how-the-nsa-caught-satoshi-nakamoto-868affcef595).) As noted above, Nakamoto is estimated to have [more than a million bitcoins](https://coincentral.com/how-rich-is-satoshi-nakamoto-today/), mined very early on. So he'd be worth well over $10Bn at current prices (as of launch), perhaps more. If he hasn't lost his thumb drive." }, { "id": 1515, "title": "Before 2028, will studies show that humans have functionally important neurogenesis throughout their life?", "short_title": "Lifelong Neurogenesis confirmed by 2028?", "url_title": "Lifelong Neurogenesis confirmed by 2028?", "slug": "lifelong-neurogenesis-confirmed-by-2028", "author_id": 100557, "author_username": "JohnMSmart", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-17T19:18:12.090780Z", "published_at": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:07.607031Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 9, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2027-12-31T08:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2028-01-01T08:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 109, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3699, "name": "Natural Sciences", "slug": "natural-sciences", "emoji": "🔬", "description": "Natural Sciences", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1515, "title": "Before 2028, will studies show that humans have functionally important neurogenesis throughout their life?", "created_at": "2018-10-17T19:18:12.090780Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-21T22:19:57.679000Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-21T22:19:57.679000Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2028-01-01T08:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2027-12-31T08:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2027-12-31T08:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "For roughly twenty years, since the work of Rusty Gage's group at UCSD circa 1998, neuroscientists have believed that a small amount of functionally significant neurogenesis (NG) occurs in both mammal (mice) and adult primate brains (monkeys). Adult NG was then found in a region called the hippocampus (HC) (and its subregion, the dentate gyrus, or DG). The HC is involved in short-term memory formation, and links to both our emotional centers of our brain (the amygdala) and our cerebral cortex, where our long term memories are stored. \n\nThis finding was later found for human brains by various studies, and it contradicted the previous longstanding \"dogma\" that adult brains don't form new neurons. The current leading theory of why NG occurs in the adult HC (if it does) is that it isn't some kind of regulatory failure (cancer, etc.) but that plays some functional role, perhaps in short-term memory storage. \n\nIn some neuroscience models, we are thought to store massive amounts of info in our HC over the last day or two of our lives, in synaptic connections, and we are also thought to flush this store out regularly, with only a subset of those memories being \"written to the cortex\" for long-term storage, usually while we dream and sleep. Adult NG is presumed by some to help this somehow, or play some other functional role.\n\nBut a [March 2018 Nature paper](https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/study-finds-no-neurogenesis-in-adult-humans-hippocampi-29987) by Sorrells and Paredes at UCSF recently found sharply decining NG after the age of 1 year in human brains, and no NG in humans after the age of 13 yrs.\n\nThe Sorrells paper used a more stringent set of surface markers to search for new neurons than previous papers, and it argues previous studies weren't sufficiently rigorous in their neural classification approaches. It has a lot of neuroscientists confused again, as it comes from a respected group using some very careful work, and it concludes that adult humans do not do functionally important neurogenesis over their lifetimes. \n\nThen in April 2018 a careful stereology-based [study by Boldrini](https://www.the-scientist.com/daily-news/abundant-neurogenesis-found-in-adult-humans-hippocampi-30050) at Columbia, also using postmortem hippocampi, contradicted the Nature paper. Boldrini's paper again argues the 20 year old view that adult human hippocampi continually does NG. They found about 1,000 neural progenitor cells in each of the front, middle, and back regions of the DG at any time, throughout the human lifespan. This is plenty enough, in some models, to be functionally important to human thinking and memory.", "resolution_criteria": "Either: \n\n1. Adult human NG exists and is functionally important to us throughout our lifespan (birth to death), or \n\n2. NG doesn't exist in significant numbers in older humans, or if it does occur it isn't functionally important.\n\n*** Assuming we find out by 2028, which will it be? Resolution is positive for option 1.***\n\nResolves positive if a definitive study or set of studies best accords with option 1, negative if it best accords with option 2. We'll define \"definitive\" as at least one study published in a top-tier journal (top 10 in the field by impact factor) with strong evidence for 1 or 2, along with the absence of a competitively compelling publication giving evidence for the other possibility, as of Jan 1 2028. Resolves ambiguous if not definitive.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1515, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763659504.843811, "end_time": 1764302227.91074, "forecaster_count": 65, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.65 ], "centers": [ 0.75 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.83 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763659504.843811, "end_time": 1764302227.91074, "forecaster_count": 65, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.65 ], "centers": [ 0.75 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.83 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.25, 0.75 ], "means": [ 0.7428472715068706 ], "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, 0.04678195401930797, 0.034326350332688736, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.11693021616061994, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.011600507024289436, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.7288472840026776, 0.0, 0.0023291363431415532, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.015157278973843901, 0.7773992382941708, 0.06876276127162699, 0.0, 1.044963886666259, 0.34120978183918704, 0.1073881054056872, 0.0, 0.038142496490550196, 0.0, 0.4091819649491931, 0.0, 0.0, 0.13813894976991253, 0.051651386754525144, 0.30286288333520944, 0.27805738515481254, 0.8609199187577559, 0.07539365390346586, 0.0, 3.612767057359897, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.2162674251014045, 0.0, 0.0012965554486791008, 0.8284076835897499, 0.09850035746144059, 1.5604905061740477, 0.3217261638678274, 0.0, 0.01946471143816275, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.5211106336061389 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728288809.087265, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 107, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728288809.087265, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 107, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.30545986156187976, 0.6945401384381202 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 14, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 244, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "For roughly twenty years, since the work of Rusty Gage's group at UCSD circa 1998, neuroscientists have believed that a small amount of functionally significant neurogenesis (NG) occurs in both mammal (mice) and adult primate brains (monkeys). Adult NG was then found in a region called the hippocampus (HC) (and its subregion, the dentate gyrus, or DG). The HC is involved in short-term memory formation, and links to both our emotional centers of our brain (the amygdala) and our cerebral cortex, where our long term memories are stored. \n\nThis finding was later found for human brains by various studies, and it contradicted the previous longstanding \"dogma\" that adult brains don't form new neurons. The current leading theory of why NG occurs in the adult HC (if it does) is that it isn't some kind of regulatory failure (cancer, etc.) but that plays some functional role, perhaps in short-term memory storage. \n\nIn some neuroscience models, we are thought to store massive amounts of info in our HC over the last day or two of our lives, in synaptic connections, and we are also thought to flush this store out regularly, with only a subset of those memories being \"written to the cortex\" for long-term storage, usually while we dream and sleep. Adult NG is presumed by some to help this somehow, or play some other functional role.\n\nBut a [March 2018 Nature paper](https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/study-finds-no-neurogenesis-in-adult-humans-hippocampi-29987) by Sorrells and Paredes at UCSF recently found sharply decining NG after the age of 1 year in human brains, and no NG in humans after the age of 13 yrs.\n\nThe Sorrells paper used a more stringent set of surface markers to search for new neurons than previous papers, and it argues previous studies weren't sufficiently rigorous in their neural classification approaches. It has a lot of neuroscientists confused again, as it comes from a respected group using some very careful work, and it concludes that adult humans do not do functionally important neurogenesis over their lifetimes. \n\nThen in April 2018 a careful stereology-based [study by Boldrini](https://www.the-scientist.com/daily-news/abundant-neurogenesis-found-in-adult-humans-hippocampi-30050) at Columbia, also using postmortem hippocampi, contradicted the Nature paper. Boldrini's paper again argues the 20 year old view that adult human hippocampi continually does NG. They found about 1,000 neural progenitor cells in each of the front, middle, and back regions of the DG at any time, throughout the human lifespan. This is plenty enough, in some models, to be functionally important to human thinking and memory." }, { "id": 1511, "title": "Will the EU Parliament election 2019 be free from any unlawful and significant election manipulation attempt?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-the-eu-parliament-election-2019-be-free-from-any-unlawful-and-significant-election-manipulation-attempt", "author_id": 100550, "author_username": "hzds", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-14T21:41:49.945359Z", "published_at": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:07.684131Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 20, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2019-05-21T22:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-05-21T22:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2019-11-27T13:26:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2019-11-27T13:26:00Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 58, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32606, "name": "2018-2019 Leaderboard", "slug": "2018_2019_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3685, "name": "Elections", "slug": "elections", "emoji": "🗳️", "description": "Elections", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3689, "name": "Politics", "slug": "politics", "emoji": "🏛️", "description": "Politics", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1511, "title": "Will the EU Parliament election 2019 be free from any unlawful and significant election manipulation attempt?", "created_at": "2018-10-14T21:41:49.945359Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-22T20:56:35.092622Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-22T20:56:35.092622Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2019-11-27T13:26:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2019-11-27T13:26:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2019-11-27T13:26:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-05-21T22:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2019-05-21T22:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "yes", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "In May 2019, the [EU][] will hold the [election][EUParlElec] for\n705 seats in the [European Parliament][EUParl] by universal adult suffrage, with about 400 million eligible voters selected from an EU population of 512 million people.\n\nOut of the [seven institutions of the EU][EUInst], the\nparliament is one of the three legislative bodies, among\nthe [European Commission][EUComm] and the [Council of the\nEuropean Union][CouncilEU].\nIt is the only directly elected body, as most of the EU\nis much more strongly oriented towards its federal roots.\nSince the [Lisbon Treaty][Treat] went into force in 2009,\nthe weight shifted in favor of the European Parliament,\nbut just like in other democratic entities, the media\nremains strongly dominated by the Executive, the Commission.\n\nThe increasing importance of the parliament, the spread\nand success of EU skeptic parties, and of course Brexit,\n_could_ make this election slightly more interesting than\npast ones.\nOr not.\nAnd the changes in the national and regional parliaments are likely to be\nreflected in the EU -- but how much?\n\n---\n\nEU Parliament Election 2019 mini-series:\n\n* [What will the EU-wide voter turnout\n be for the EU Parliament election,\n 2019?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1496/)\n* Seats\n * [How many seats will the EPP\n get?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1507/)\n * [How many seats will the S&D\n get?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1508/)\n * [Will the current coalition (i.e. EPP, S&D, and ALDE)\n continue?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1509)\n * [How many seats will the various eurosceptic groups\n achieve? (i.e. ECR, EFDD, ENF, and maybe their\n successors)](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1510/)\n* Election Process\n * [Will the EU Parliament election 2019 be free from\n any unlawful and significant election manipulation\n attempt?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1511/)\n\nAll questions will close one day before the election.\nShould no elections be held in 2019, all resolve ambiguous.\n\nIn case of regional issues, the result that is accepted by the EU\ncounts, even if those results are interim and will receive minor\ncorrections potentially after the Parliament voted on the\nPresident of the EU Commission.\n\nAll will be resolved by reference to the official results,\nwhich will likely be made available somewhere at\nhttps://data.europa.eu/.\n\n---\n\n### Will the EU Parliament election 2019 be free from any unlawful and significant election manipulation attempt?\n\nThe question will resolve once the executive government is active. \"Significant\" means that in case of success it would have moved at least one seat in the parliament. To resolve negative any single attempt needs to be both unlawful and significant. If no such attempt has been found until the resolution time, this question resolved positive. If the attempt is only recognized after the new coalition has taken up operations, it resolves positive. If the attempt would not have moved a seat, it resolves positive. The direction of the attempt is irrelevant. Any unquantifiable attempts would resolve positive, as would any proper marketing operations, as would if all of \"the Russians\" and \"China\" together with \"North Korean Elite Hackers\" proclaim successful operations without any other outside confirmation.\n\n[EU]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union \"European Union\"\n[EUParl]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament \"European Parliament\"\n[EUComm]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission \"European Commission\"\n[CouncilEU]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union \"Council of the European Union\"\n[EUInst]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutions_of_the_European_Union \"Institutions of the European Union\"\n[EUParlElec]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2019 \"European Parliament election, 2019\"\n[Treat]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon \"Treaty of Lisbon\"", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1511, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1558441436.208589, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 58, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.72 ], "centers": [ 0.85 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.92 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1558441436.208589, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 58, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.72 ], "centers": [ 0.85 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.92 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.15000000000000002, 0.85 ], "means": [ 0.8240397684187818 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.006942996711877092, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.02077269865532973, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.04816139989060515, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.05364551847354191, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.005705735607831822, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.018129373144611455, 0.0, 0.03041962011451429, 0.0027844015881518533, 0.0, 0.0, 0.18083333788416256, 0.03850858165784335, 0.0, 0.12899150325450517, 0.0, 0.854006737290409, 0.3214117050299051, 1.0, 0.0, 0.5027964435460978, 0.10746304061856489, 0.0, 0.167827063947821, 0.07311124410978406, 0.0, 0.8038939744873385, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0033653472634614153, 0.0, 0.0, 0.12946367365830186, 0.8376315234880876, 1.781150620615401, 0.8759394317132335, 1.153114843568373, 0.05960942483775391, 0.15674887987630198, 0.012943728948726814, 0.23425169948257646, 0.9361882784028203, 0.9792205412978965, 0.0, 1.6630438130654315, 0.0, 0.0, 0.43455049684738395, 0.11500331902557702 ] ] }, "score_data": { "peer_score": 13.771063044844713, "coverage": 0.9999706409458451, "baseline_score": 53.19028978733535, "spot_peer_score": 35.151543429217675, "peer_archived_score": 13.771063044844713, "baseline_archived_score": 53.19028978733535, "spot_peer_archived_score": 35.151543429217675 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1558433855.989683, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 58, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1558433855.989683, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 58, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.4337510169145963, 0.5662489830854037 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 8, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 112, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1509, "title": "Will the current coalition (i.e. EPP, S&D, and ALDE) continue after the EU Parliament election, 2019?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-the-current-coalition-ie-epp-sd-and-alde-continue-after-the-eu-parliament-election-2019", "author_id": 100550, "author_username": "hzds", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-14T21:24:49.163114Z", "published_at": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:19.916131Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 40, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2019-05-21T22:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-05-21T22:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2019-12-05T18:26:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2019-12-05T18:26:00Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 46, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32606, "name": "2018-2019 Leaderboard", "slug": "2018_2019_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3685, "name": "Elections", "slug": "elections", "emoji": "🗳️", "description": "Elections", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3689, "name": "Politics", "slug": "politics", "emoji": "🏛️", "description": "Politics", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1509, "title": "Will the current coalition (i.e. EPP, S&D, and ALDE) continue after the EU Parliament election, 2019?", "created_at": "2018-10-14T21:24:49.163114Z", "open_time": "2018-10-21T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-23T07:00:00Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-23T07:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2019-12-05T18:26:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2019-12-05T18:26:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2019-12-05T18:26:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2019-05-21T22:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2019-05-21T22:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "yes", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "In May 2019, the [EU][] will hold the [election][EUParlElec] for\n705 seats in the [European Parliament][EUParl] by universal adult suffrage, with about 400 million eligible voters selected from an EU population of 512 million people.\n\nOut of the [seven institutions of the EU][EUInst], the\nparliament is one of the three legislative bodies, among\nthe [European Commission][EUComm] and the [Council of the\nEuropean Union][CouncilEU].\nIt is the only directly elected body, as most of the EU\nis much more strongly oriented towards its federal roots.\nSince the [Lisbon Treaty][Treat] went into force in 2009,\nthe weight shifted in favor of the European Parliament,\nbut just like in other democratic entities, the media\nremains strongly dominated by the Executive, the Commission.\n\nThe increasing importance of the parliament, the spread\nand success of EU skeptic parties, and of course Brexit,\n_could_ make this election slightly more interesting than\npast ones.\nOr not.\nAnd the changes in the national and regional parliaments are likely to be\nreflected in the EU -- but how much?\n\n---\n\nEU Parliament Election 2019 mini-series:\n\n* [What will the EU-wide voter turnout\n be for the EU Parliament election,\n 2019?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1496/)\n* Seats\n * [How many seats will the EPP\n get?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1507/)\n * [How many seats will the S&D\n get?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1508/)\n * [Will the current coalition (i.e. EPP, S&D, and ALDE)\n continue?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1509)\n * [How many seats will the various eurosceptic groups\n achieve? (i.e. ECR, EFDD, ENF, and maybe their\n successors)](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1510/)\n* Election Process\n * [Will the EU Parliament election 2019 be free from\n any unlawful and significant election manipulation\n attempt?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1511/)\n\nAll questions will close one day before the election.\nShould no elections be held in 2019, all resolve ambiguous.\n\nIn case of regional issues, the result that is accepted by the EU\ncounts, even if those results are interim and will receive minor\ncorrections potentially after the Parliament voted on the\nPresident of the EU Commission.\n\nAll will be resolved by reference to the official results,\nwhich will likely be made available somewhere at\nhttps://data.europa.eu/.\n\n---\n\n### Will the current coalition consisting of thee EPP, S&D, and ALDE continue after the EU Parliament election, 2019?\n\nAll previous parties, and only those parties, must be in the coalition for the question to resolve positive. Should only EPP and S&D remain, it's a negative, should they incorporate another party, it's a negative, etc. etc.\n\nFor each party: Should that EU party be replaced with an obvious successor (more than 75% of previous members remain, counted my number of national parties), that one would count. Otherwise, it would count as a different party, and cause negative resolution.\n\n[EU]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union \"European Union\"\n[EUParl]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament \"European Parliament\"\n[EUComm]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission \"European Commission\"\n[CouncilEU]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_the_European_Union \"Council of the European Union\"\n[EUInst]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutions_of_the_European_Union \"Institutions of the European Union\"\n[EUParlElec]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2019 \"European Parliament election, 2019\"\n[Treat]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon \"Treaty of Lisbon\"", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1509, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1558453396.480191, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 46, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.54 ], "centers": [ 0.55 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.6 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1558453396.480191, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 46, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.54 ], "centers": [ 0.55 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.6 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.44999999999999996, 0.55 ], "means": [ 0.5716069600874353 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.015977422099957932, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.18575801079970408, 0.0, 0.8614998454466418, 0.061894126969327355, 0.0030815271309911525, 0.2629100958541965, 0.12345059748575654, 0.0, 0.0, 0.22518626811013776, 0.0, 0.0, 0.02678127518047141, 0.13717490894663273, 0.8546936726237416, 0.004662905996750363, 0.0, 0.0, 2.467621335043453, 1.02722485935117, 2.2428808711498665, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.1401589218602601, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.23824817823337768, 0.006407544366770682, 0.0, 0.29683892709897775, 0.0, 0.031250959703169254, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.3542447088992047, 0.0, 0.8067339101294311, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.013130201551318676, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.6844047848430631, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 ] ] }, "score_data": { "peer_score": 10.227479264756566, "coverage": 0.9997730376858412, "baseline_score": 5.969117054946369, "spot_peer_score": 7.6979358340911865, "peer_archived_score": 10.227479264756566, "baseline_archived_score": 5.969117054946369, "spot_peer_archived_score": 7.6979358340911865 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1558247888.898056, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 45, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1558247888.898056, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 45, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.7358776901883086, 0.2641223098116914 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 4, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 86, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1502, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to biotechnology or bioengineered organisms?", "short_title": "GC caused by synthetic bio, if GC occurs?", "url_title": "GC caused by synthetic bio, if GC occurs?", "slug": "gc-caused-by-synthetic-bio-if-gc-occurs", "author_id": 104761, "author_username": "Tamay", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-10T16:28:11.620087Z", "published_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-05T19:34:33.640829Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 27, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-06-16T22:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 225, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "topic": [ { "id": 15865, "name": "Health & Pandemics", "slug": "biosecurity", "emoji": "🧬", "type": "topic" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "category": [ { "id": 3699, "name": "Natural Sciences", "slug": "natural-sciences", "emoji": "🔬", "description": "Natural Sciences", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3691, "name": "Health & Pandemics", "slug": "health-pandemics", "emoji": "🦠", "description": "Health & Pandemics", "type": "category" } ], "question_series": [ { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } }, "question": { "id": 1502, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to biotechnology or bioengineered organisms?", "created_at": "2018-10-10T16:28:11.620087Z", "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-15T07:00:00Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-15T07:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-06-16T22:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\n\nNo single disease currently exists that combines the worst-case levels of transmissibility, lethality, resistance to therapies, and global reach. But we know that the worst-case attributes can be realized independently. For example, some diseases exhibit nearly a 100% case fatality ratio in the absence of treatment, such as rabies or septicemic plague. The 1918 flu [has a track record of spreading to virtually every human community worldwide](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2021692). Chickenpox and HSV-1, [can reportedly reach over 95% of a given population](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18080353).\n\nThe past decades have seen rapid advances in biotechnology, in part due to the falling costs of gene sequencing and synthesis. Improvements in ease-of-use of certain specific kinds of biotechnology bring increased concerns about biological risks. Gene synthesisers have the capacity to turn digital sequence data into physical genetic sequences, enabling individuals to create viruses from digital files ([as was done with the 1918 Spanish Flu virus](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16210530)).\n\nThe implications of these technologies are worrying, especially given the track record of state-run bioweapon research applying cutting-edge science and technology to design pathogens that are more virulent, more resistant to therapies, harder to diagnose and treat than those in nature.\n\nWhile there is no evidence of state-run bioweapons programs directly attempting to develop or deploy bioweapons that would pose an catastrophic risk, the logic of deterrence and mutually assured destruction could create such incentives, especially in a more unstable political climate, or following a breakdown of the [Biological Weapons Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_Weapons_Convention).\n\nDeliberate or accidental [gene drives](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive) that might not directly target human populations may also pose major risks. There are broadly [three features that give rise to the ecological risk of gene drives](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK379271/):\n\n> (i) a gene drive is passed on from one generation to the next at a rate greater than occurs naturally; (ii) a gene drive construct can have effects on other parts of the organism's genome beyond the target; and (iii) gene-drive modified organisms are designed to spread, along with their effects, into the larger environment. \n\n[Examples of such unanticipated consequences](https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2017/11/jri-si-hayes-identifying-detecting-adverse-ecological-outcomes-associated-release-gene-drive-modified-organisms-2018.pdf) that could rapidly proliferate the ecosystem are:\n\n- New phenotypes with a different (possibly increased) capacity to spread diseases or pathogens, \n- Cascading effects on food web caused by decrease in abundance of predators leading to possible loss of ecosystem services, \n- The gene drive being acquired by, and spreads within, non-target species (possibly humans), leading to suppression or modification of the nontarget species. \n\nFinally, accidents. [A report by Gryphon Scientific, Risk and Benefit Analysis of Gain of Function Research](http://www.gryphonscientific.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Final-Gain-of-Function-Risk-Benefit-Analysis-Report-12.14.2015.pdf), has laid out a detailed risk assessments of potentially pandemic pathogen research, suggesting that the annual probability of a global pandemic resulting from an accident with this type of research in the United States is 0.002% to 0.1%. Since similar research is done outside of the United States, in potentially more accident-prone labs, the world seems to be exposed to worryingly high level of risk from accidental outbreaks ([which some have estimated to be around 0.016% to 0.8% chance of a pandemic each year](https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/hs.2017.0028))", "resolution_criteria": "[In the headline question to this series](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/), we defined a global catastrophe as a 10% decrease in the world population in any period of 5 years. \n\n**If a global catastrophe happens before 2100, will it be principally due to the deployment biotechnologies or bioengineered organisms?**\n\nThe question resolves positively if a global biotechnology catastrophe occurs resulting from the deployment biotechnologies or bioengineered organisms (including viruses) that claims at least 10% in any period of 5 years or less before 2100, and resolves as ambiguous if no global catastrophe occurs. Bioengineering is here defined to include the application of biotechnology to enhance or increase the virulenc, infectiousness or resistance to treatment of naturally ocurring viruses.\n\n If the failure-mode is less direct, such as through indirect ecological effects of gene drives, the catastrophe must be generally believed very unlikely in a counterfactual world with little or no biotechnological interventions but otherwise similar to ours. Years are here defined as consecutive calendar years.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1502, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1762371157.200513, "end_time": 1784343283.317, "forecaster_count": 223, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.18 ], "centers": [ 0.228 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.33 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1762371157.200513, "end_time": 1784343283.317, "forecaster_count": 223, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.18 ], "centers": [ 0.228 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.33 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.772, 0.228 ], "means": [ 0.2817659508465452 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.6595306676265233, 0.254712544591182, 0.21138030747198827, 2.863019671127185e-05, 0.8938436611134263, 0.0, 0.0, 0.9154348088007344, 0.5218747481403883, 1.495278118059261, 0.12895484292599768, 0.7149608449440981, 0.3948951189453161, 0.028005122714056807, 0.7604852854812806, 2.5565019171326117e-05, 0.07395070790419844, 1.0026623220241655, 0.5047649021885106, 4.640093248318328, 0.3354924530362492, 0.9190944642171557, 2.18232254496689, 0.11923640321114325, 1.12135394301801, 0.008720489343135879, 0.156092763759128, 0.1205979392467803, 0.0, 2.625752033851419, 0.005325589006846691, 0.04826671354504731, 1.0475739948739602, 0.006646666713281704, 1.254699181774041, 0.00041312675695540855, 2.275913770269241e-05, 0.28411102279133205, 0.22868748047033075, 0.7660948937930229, 0.34069144574302296, 3.5614105978179975e-05, 0.005592157113873248, 0.012307692935317022, 0.06543952093863145, 0.0, 0.05875190747773748, 0.0034840285425064756, 0.0, 0.03702837122936255, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.08355422138610907, 0.5596272014349112, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.203977453651077, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.003676458074715173, 0.1339435897408587, 0.002709085003279706, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.35090342077519693, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0003104368922973556, 0.11920196397308126, 0.5101663912637033, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.24526028009906375, 0.001492899988076223, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0006215152637402876, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.000248532995552835, 0.0, 0.0, 1.1987495191288515 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728289728.990089, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 217, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728289728.990089, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 217, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.8612100011809215, 0.13878999881907847 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 33, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 476, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\n\nNo single disease currently exists that combines the worst-case levels of transmissibility, lethality, resistance to therapies, and global reach. But we know that the worst-case attributes can be realized independently. For example, some diseases exhibit nearly a 100% case fatality ratio in the absence of treatment, such as rabies or septicemic plague. The 1918 flu [has a track record of spreading to virtually every human community worldwide](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2021692). Chickenpox and HSV-1, [can reportedly reach over 95% of a given population](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18080353).\n\nThe past decades have seen rapid advances in biotechnology, in part due to the falling costs of gene sequencing and synthesis. Improvements in ease-of-use of certain specific kinds of biotechnology bring increased concerns about biological risks. Gene synthesisers have the capacity to turn digital sequence data into physical genetic sequences, enabling individuals to create viruses from digital files ([as was done with the 1918 Spanish Flu virus](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16210530)).\n\nThe implications of these technologies are worrying, especially given the track record of state-run bioweapon research applying cutting-edge science and technology to design pathogens that are more virulent, more resistant to therapies, harder to diagnose and treat than those in nature.\n\nWhile there is no evidence of state-run bioweapons programs directly attempting to develop or deploy bioweapons that would pose an catastrophic risk, the logic of deterrence and mutually assured destruction could create such incentives, especially in a more unstable political climate, or following a breakdown of the [Biological Weapons Convention](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_Weapons_Convention).\n\nDeliberate or accidental [gene drives](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive) that might not directly target human populations may also pose major risks. There are broadly [three features that give rise to the ecological risk of gene drives](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK379271/):\n\n> (i) a gene drive is passed on from one generation to the next at a rate greater than occurs naturally; (ii) a gene drive construct can have effects on other parts of the organism's genome beyond the target; and (iii) gene-drive modified organisms are designed to spread, along with their effects, into the larger environment. \n\n[Examples of such unanticipated consequences](https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2017/11/jri-si-hayes-identifying-detecting-adverse-ecological-outcomes-associated-release-gene-drive-modified-organisms-2018.pdf) that could rapidly proliferate the ecosystem are:\n\n- New phenotypes with a different (possibly increased) capacity to spread diseases or pathogens, \n- Cascading effects on food web caused by decrease in abundance of predators leading to possible loss of ecosystem services, \n- The gene drive being acquired by, and spreads within, non-target species (possibly humans), leading to suppression or modification of the nontarget species. \n\nFinally, accidents. [A report by Gryphon Scientific, Risk and Benefit Analysis of Gain of Function Research](http://www.gryphonscientific.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Final-Gain-of-Function-Risk-Benefit-Analysis-Report-12.14.2015.pdf), has laid out a detailed risk assessments of potentially pandemic pathogen research, suggesting that the annual probability of a global pandemic resulting from an accident with this type of research in the United States is 0.002% to 0.1%. Since similar research is done outside of the United States, in potentially more accident-prone labs, the world seems to be exposed to worryingly high level of risk from accidental outbreaks ([which some have estimated to be around 0.016% to 0.8% chance of a pandemic each year](https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/hs.2017.0028))" }, { "id": 1501, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to nanotechnology failure-mode?", "short_title": "GC to be caused by nanotech, if it occurs?", "url_title": "GC to be caused by nanotech, if it occurs?", "slug": "gc-to-be-caused-by-nanotech-if-it-occurs", "author_id": 104761, "author_username": "Tamay", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-10T15:21:11.006648Z", "published_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-21T22:19:17.947842Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 9, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2101-06-01T22:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 183, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "question_series": [ { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3701, "name": "Technology", "slug": "technology", "emoji": "⚙️", "description": "Technology", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1501, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to nanotechnology failure-mode?", "created_at": "2018-10-10T15:21:11.006648Z", "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-14T06:54:48.667000Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-14T06:54:48.667000Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2101-06-01T22:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\n\nIn 1959, Richard Feynman pointed out that nanometre‐scale machines could be built and operated, and that the precision inherent in molecular construction would make it easy to build multiple identical copies. This raised the possibility of manufacturing at ever increasing speeds, in which production systems could rapidly and cheaply increase their productive capacity. This in turn suggested the possibility of destructive runaway self‐replication.\n\nAs Eric Drexler, a nanotech pioneer, first warned in [Engines of Creation](http://xaonon.dyndns.org/misc/engines_of_creation.pdf) in 1986 (pg. 146), \n\n> In a mature form, molecular nanotechnology would enable the construction of bacterium-scale self-replicating mechanical robots that can feed on dirt or other organic matter. Such replicators could eat up the biosphere or destroy it by other means such as by poisoning it, burning it, or blocking out sunlight. \n\n> Plants with ‘leaves’ no more efficient than today’s solar cells could out‐compete real plants, crowding the biosphere with an inedible foliage. Tough omnivorous “bacteria” could out‐compete real bacteria: They could spread like blowing pollen, replicate swiftly, and reduce the biosphere to dust in a matter of days. A person of malicious intent in possession of this technology might cause a catastrophe on Earth by releasing such nanobots into the environment.\n\nSuch self-replicating systems, if not countered, could make the earth largely uninhabitable. Other potential risks include [ecological and health disasters resulting from nano-pollutants](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution_from_nanomaterials), [the use of misuse of nanotechnology weaponry](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/are-nanoweapons-paving-the-road-to-human-extinction_us_59332a52e4b00573ab57a3fe), and, given the general-purpose character of nanotech, possibly much more.\n\nMoreover, the technology to produce a destructive nanobot seems considerably easier to develop than the technology to create an effective defense against such an attack (a global nanotech immune system, an “active shield”). Regulation might also be hard. Nanotech doesn’t require rare radioactive isotopes or large, easily identifiable manufacturing plants, as does production of nuclear weapons.\n\nAlthough only small portion of scientists might currently be working to develop self-replicating nanotech, [a recent study done for NASA's Institute for Advanced Concepts](https://foresight.org/study_finds_self-replicating_nanomachines_feasible/) by General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems suggests that a useful self-replicating machine could be less complex than a [Pentium 4 chip](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4), and uncovered no road blocks to extending macroscale systems to microscale and then to nanoscale self-replicating systems. Drexler [points out that much of recent surprising progress](https://www.theguardian.com/science/small-world/2013/oct/21/big-nanotech-atomically-precise-manufacturing-apm) comes from disparate fields, and isn't labelled generally \"nanotechnology\".\n\n<small>\n\nThis question is part of the Ragnarök Question Series. Check out the other questions in the series:\n\n1. [If a global biological catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2514/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-biological-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n2. [If an artificial intelligence catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2513/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-an-artificial-intelligence-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n3. [If a nuclear catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1585/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-nuclear-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n4. [If a global climate disaster occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1604/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-climate-disaster-occurs-by-2100-will-the-earths-human-population-decline-by-95-or-more/)\n\n5. [If a global nanotechnology catastrophe occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/7795/)\n\nAlso, please check out our questions on whether a global catastrophe will occur by 2100, and if so, which?:\n\n6. [By 2100 will the human population decrease by at least 10% during any period of 5 years?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/)\n\n7. [Will such a catastrophe be due to either human-made climate change or geoengineering?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1500/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-either-human-made-climate-change-or-geoengineering/)\n\n8. [Will such a catastrophe be due to a nanotechnology failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1501/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nanotechnology-failure-mode/)\n\n9. [Will such a catastrophe be due to nuclear war?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1494/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nuclear-war/)\n\n10. [Will such a catastrophe be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1495/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-an-artificial-intelligence-failure-mode/)\n\n11. [Will such a catastrophe be due to biotechnology or bioengineered organisms?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1502/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-biotechnology-or-bioengineered-organisms/)\n\nAll results [are analysed here](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2568/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-results-so-far/), and will be updated periodically.\n\n</small>", "resolution_criteria": "**If a global catastrophe happens before 2100, will it be principally due to the deployment nanotechnology?**\n\nIn [the headline question to this series](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/), we defined a global catastrophe as a 10% decrease in the world population in any period of 5 years.\n\nThe question resolves positively if a global nanotechnology catastrophe occurs that claims at least 10% in any period of 5 years or less before 2100, and resolves as ambiguous if no global catastrophe occurs. Years are here defined as consecutive calendar years.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1501, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1758438057.533814, "end_time": 1783361706.85, "forecaster_count": 182, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.01 ], "centers": [ 0.02 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.05 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1758438057.533814, "end_time": 1783361706.85, "forecaster_count": 182, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.01 ], "centers": [ 0.02 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.05 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.98, 0.02 ], "means": [ 0.04926562223826818 ], "histogram": [ [ 2.991946179832203, 6.540138187722916, 4.736557038804993, 3.1899744715047653, 0.695605438824926, 0.9809426702703786, 0.314879649893394, 0.9264800437461529, 0.08241001859744704, 0.3594751373771391, 1.551713263675389, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.049655352904120285, 0.028124065500330617, 0.0, 0.0, 0.5043478409402454, 0.0009028114188642056, 2.0293419563878268, 0.028988293811370674, 0.0, 0.31788839282824527, 0.0, 0.001874084487187542, 0.0, 0.00024986616073284496, 0.0, 0.0, 0.11949912914521221, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.010026304937650755, 0.0, 0.0007722654322346822, 0.0, 0.010604618627011876, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.008455487195202083, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.00371276361089826, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 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 }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728289061.161396, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 174, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728289061.161396, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 174, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.9927339824029102, 0.00726601759708975 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 12, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 357, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\n\nIn 1959, Richard Feynman pointed out that nanometre‐scale machines could be built and operated, and that the precision inherent in molecular construction would make it easy to build multiple identical copies. This raised the possibility of manufacturing at ever increasing speeds, in which production systems could rapidly and cheaply increase their productive capacity. This in turn suggested the possibility of destructive runaway self‐replication.\n\nAs Eric Drexler, a nanotech pioneer, first warned in [Engines of Creation](http://xaonon.dyndns.org/misc/engines_of_creation.pdf) in 1986 (pg. 146), \n\n> In a mature form, molecular nanotechnology would enable the construction of bacterium-scale self-replicating mechanical robots that can feed on dirt or other organic matter. Such replicators could eat up the biosphere or destroy it by other means such as by poisoning it, burning it, or blocking out sunlight. \n\n> Plants with ‘leaves’ no more efficient than today’s solar cells could out‐compete real plants, crowding the biosphere with an inedible foliage. Tough omnivorous “bacteria” could out‐compete real bacteria: They could spread like blowing pollen, replicate swiftly, and reduce the biosphere to dust in a matter of days. A person of malicious intent in possession of this technology might cause a catastrophe on Earth by releasing such nanobots into the environment.\n\nSuch self-replicating systems, if not countered, could make the earth largely uninhabitable. Other potential risks include [ecological and health disasters resulting from nano-pollutants](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution_from_nanomaterials), [the use of misuse of nanotechnology weaponry](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/are-nanoweapons-paving-the-road-to-human-extinction_us_59332a52e4b00573ab57a3fe), and, given the general-purpose character of nanotech, possibly much more.\n\nMoreover, the technology to produce a destructive nanobot seems considerably easier to develop than the technology to create an effective defense against such an attack (a global nanotech immune system, an “active shield”). Regulation might also be hard. Nanotech doesn’t require rare radioactive isotopes or large, easily identifiable manufacturing plants, as does production of nuclear weapons.\n\nAlthough only small portion of scientists might currently be working to develop self-replicating nanotech, [a recent study done for NASA's Institute for Advanced Concepts](https://foresight.org/study_finds_self-replicating_nanomachines_feasible/) by General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems suggests that a useful self-replicating machine could be less complex than a [Pentium 4 chip](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4), and uncovered no road blocks to extending macroscale systems to microscale and then to nanoscale self-replicating systems. Drexler [points out that much of recent surprising progress](https://www.theguardian.com/science/small-world/2013/oct/21/big-nanotech-atomically-precise-manufacturing-apm) comes from disparate fields, and isn't labelled generally \"nanotechnology\".\n\n<small>\n\nThis question is part of the Ragnarök Question Series. Check out the other questions in the series:\n\n1. [If a global biological catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2514/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-biological-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n2. [If an artificial intelligence catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2513/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-an-artificial-intelligence-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n3. [If a nuclear catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1585/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-nuclear-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n4. [If a global climate disaster occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1604/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-climate-disaster-occurs-by-2100-will-the-earths-human-population-decline-by-95-or-more/)\n\n5. [If a global nanotechnology catastrophe occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/7795/)\n\nAlso, please check out our questions on whether a global catastrophe will occur by 2100, and if so, which?:\n\n6. [By 2100 will the human population decrease by at least 10% during any period of 5 years?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/)\n\n7. [Will such a catastrophe be due to either human-made climate change or geoengineering?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1500/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-either-human-made-climate-change-or-geoengineering/)\n\n8. [Will such a catastrophe be due to a nanotechnology failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1501/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nanotechnology-failure-mode/)\n\n9. [Will such a catastrophe be due to nuclear war?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1494/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nuclear-war/)\n\n10. [Will such a catastrophe be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1495/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-an-artificial-intelligence-failure-mode/)\n\n11. [Will such a catastrophe be due to biotechnology or bioengineered organisms?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1502/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-biotechnology-or-bioengineered-organisms/)\n\nAll results [are analysed here](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2568/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-results-so-far/), and will be updated periodically.\n\n</small>" }, { "id": 1500, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to either human-made climate change or geoengineering?", "short_title": "GC caused by climate meddling, if it occurs", "url_title": "GC caused by climate meddling, if it occurs", "slug": "gc-caused-by-climate-meddling-if-it-occurs", "author_id": 104761, "author_username": "Tamay", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-09T09:42:56.896909Z", "published_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-05T17:14:46.160429Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 52, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-06-01T22:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 283, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "topic": [ { "id": 15867, "name": "Environment & Climate", "slug": "climate", "emoji": "🌎", "type": "topic" }, { "id": 15854, "name": "Top Questions", "slug": "top-50", "emoji": "✨🔝", "type": "topic" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "category": [ { "id": 3697, "name": "Environment & Climate", "slug": "environment-climate", "emoji": "🌱", "description": "Environment & Climate", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3699, "name": "Natural Sciences", "slug": "natural-sciences", "emoji": "🔬", "description": "Natural Sciences", "type": "category" } ], "question_series": [ { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } }, "question": { "id": 1500, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to either human-made climate change or geoengineering?", "created_at": "2018-10-09T09:42:56.896909Z", "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-13T23:45:06.136000Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-13T23:45:06.136000Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-06-01T22:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\n\n[According to current IPCC estimates](http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf), unmitigated greenhouse emissions are likely to lead to global temperature increases of 2.6ºC-4.8ºC by 2100. If this happened, there’d likely be significant humanitarian harms, including more severe weather, food crises, and the spread of infectious diseases which would disproportionately affect the world’s worst off.\n\nMoreover, the [estimated humanitarian impacts of climate changes are likely to be highly nonlinear](https://www.givewell.org/shallow/climate-change/extreme-risks): marginal temperature increases are expected to cause more damage at already-increased temperatures (i.e. going from 3ºC to 4ºC is expected to be significantly worse than going from 1ºC to 2ºC). \n\n[According to some](https://www.givewell.org/shallow/climate-change/extreme-risks), there is also a non-negligible chance — perhaps around 10% — that unmitigated emissions will lead to global temperature increases even higher than 4.8ºC. More generally, estimates of temperature increases resulting from greenhouse emissions have a [“fat” right tail](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-e-mann/the-fat-tail-of-climate-change-risk_b_8116264.html), meaning that there is a low, but non-negligible chance of very high temperature increases.\nHence, there is a non-negligible chance that unmitigated emissions may produce consequences which could be catastrophic for life on Earth. \n\nFor example, [it has been argued](https://www.givewell.org/shallow/climate-change/extreme-risks#footnote7_jr7z9s5) that a 12ºC increase in mean global temperature—which is substantially outside the range considered plausible this century—would cause at least one day each year in the territories where half of all people live today to be hot enough to exceed human metabolic limits and cause tissue damage from hyperthermia after a few hours of exposure. \n\nOne way to reduce global temperatures quickly and cheaply is a form of climate engineering called [Solar Radiation Management (SRM)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_radiation_management) which involves [cooling the Earth by reflecting sunlight back into space](http://johnhalstead.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Halstead-Stratospheric-aerosol-injection-research-and-exist.pdf). The most researched form of SRM involves injecting aerosols into the stratosphere. Most of the evidence so far suggests that ideal SRM deployment programmes would reduce overall damages relative to an un-engineered greenhouse world. \n\nHowever, SRM brings its own risks. Of the currently known potential negative direct effects of SRM, only abrupt termination could plausibly bring about an existential catastrophe. If a very thick stratospheric veil were deployed and SRM was suddenly terminated and not resumed within a buffer period of a few months, then there would be very rapid and damaging warming. [There might also be some reasons](https://nickbostrom.com/papers/unilateralist.pdf) to expect the chance of at least one country to undertake climate engineering to be surprisingly high, especially when the relevant technologies are widespread, and the lack of global coordination permits each country to individually decide for or against the intervention.", "resolution_criteria": "**If a global catastrophe happens before 2100, will it be principally due to human-made climate change, or the use of geoengineering as a deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth’s climate system?**\n\n[In the headline question to this series](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/), we defined a global catastrophe as a 10% decrease in the world population in any period of 5 years or less. This question resolves ambiguously if no such global catastrophe occurs. On the other hand...\n\nThe question results positively if a human-made climate change or geoengineering catastrophe occurs that claims at least 10% in any period of 5 years or less before 2100. This catastrophe must be due to the direct effects of climate change that are generally believed very unlikely in a counterfactual world with little or no global warming but otherwise similar to ours. These include (but are not limited to) floods, extreme weather, the spreading of infectious disease, and the health effects of extreme heat. Finally, the effects due to the effects of the use of geoengineering that has been principally motivated to mitigate climate change risks, also count towards the population decline. Years are here defined as consecutive calendar years.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1500, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1762362875.274545, "end_time": 1784343275.116, "forecaster_count": 281, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.03 ], "centers": [ 0.1 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1762362875.274545, "end_time": 1784343275.116, "forecaster_count": 281, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.03 ], "centers": [ 0.1 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.9, 0.1 ], "means": [ 0.2589860421740923 ], "histogram": [ [ 2.004168702088602, 3.3471129069808283, 2.1116244549505656, 0.5645858596801179, 1.6374222124333184, 3.0550546405053254, 0.21935409591438926, 0.038977924223429015, 0.3216145285368116, 0.23025993250853852, 3.093862949035177, 1.0002000699779217, 0.4417556111889191, 1.5287260411742305, 0.0, 1.0474096613195494, 0.0, 0.1758795055863295, 0.30968865399697404, 0.004904846544493005, 0.7044429721901878, 0.006132711091580499, 0.0, 0.020672398226491424, 0.0, 0.7165914283147966, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0005352540413781318, 0.0, 0.15313742925390622, 0.09291166259494309, 0.0, 0.11112491516462802, 0.0011518610758652727, 0.008856735154789394, 0.6161689903175323, 0.0001564061178015001, 0.3984891148288753, 0.0, 0.7231870874721728, 4.909190272315367e-07, 7.038784009236774e-06, 2.212478389728738e-06, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.00012937376520057663, 0.0, 0.916020217992237, 0.00010650895323901862, 0.5921207098657992, 0.0, 0.0, 0.00040240267635377675, 1.639569155511883e-05, 0.0026152363899923895, 0.0, 0.0, 0.08192696054536582, 0.0, 0.0, 4.593268667951849e-06, 0.6964288379352365, 0.00011370435375142768, 0.01597713789299142, 0.0, 0.11832552385875887, 0.0, 7.332721492456093e-05, 8.597534338419637e-06, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.000949402238429491, 1.7875084906260253e-05, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.042082150578492225, 0.0, 0.0, 0.4662400660825712, 0.00023951252618940113, 0.9708412502344885, 0.0, 0.0, 0.00042515590787964254, 0.8104956888104379, 0.03560430908070259, 0.2629461570790656, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.374066841787014, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.9542456461393782 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728289708.221787, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 261, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728289708.221787, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 261, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.9788831975436789, 0.02111680245632111 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 34, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 607, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\n\n[According to current IPCC estimates](http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pdf), unmitigated greenhouse emissions are likely to lead to global temperature increases of 2.6ºC-4.8ºC by 2100. If this happened, there’d likely be significant humanitarian harms, including more severe weather, food crises, and the spread of infectious diseases which would disproportionately affect the world’s worst off.\n\nMoreover, the [estimated humanitarian impacts of climate changes are likely to be highly nonlinear](https://www.givewell.org/shallow/climate-change/extreme-risks): marginal temperature increases are expected to cause more damage at already-increased temperatures (i.e. going from 3ºC to 4ºC is expected to be significantly worse than going from 1ºC to 2ºC). \n\n[According to some](https://www.givewell.org/shallow/climate-change/extreme-risks), there is also a non-negligible chance — perhaps around 10% — that unmitigated emissions will lead to global temperature increases even higher than 4.8ºC. More generally, estimates of temperature increases resulting from greenhouse emissions have a [“fat” right tail](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-e-mann/the-fat-tail-of-climate-change-risk_b_8116264.html), meaning that there is a low, but non-negligible chance of very high temperature increases.\nHence, there is a non-negligible chance that unmitigated emissions may produce consequences which could be catastrophic for life on Earth. \n\nFor example, [it has been argued](https://www.givewell.org/shallow/climate-change/extreme-risks#footnote7_jr7z9s5) that a 12ºC increase in mean global temperature—which is substantially outside the range considered plausible this century—would cause at least one day each year in the territories where half of all people live today to be hot enough to exceed human metabolic limits and cause tissue damage from hyperthermia after a few hours of exposure. \n\nOne way to reduce global temperatures quickly and cheaply is a form of climate engineering called [Solar Radiation Management (SRM)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_radiation_management) which involves [cooling the Earth by reflecting sunlight back into space](http://johnhalstead.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Halstead-Stratospheric-aerosol-injection-research-and-exist.pdf). The most researched form of SRM involves injecting aerosols into the stratosphere. Most of the evidence so far suggests that ideal SRM deployment programmes would reduce overall damages relative to an un-engineered greenhouse world. \n\nHowever, SRM brings its own risks. Of the currently known potential negative direct effects of SRM, only abrupt termination could plausibly bring about an existential catastrophe. If a very thick stratospheric veil were deployed and SRM was suddenly terminated and not resumed within a buffer period of a few months, then there would be very rapid and damaging warming. [There might also be some reasons](https://nickbostrom.com/papers/unilateralist.pdf) to expect the chance of at least one country to undertake climate engineering to be surprisingly high, especially when the relevant technologies are widespread, and the lack of global coordination permits each country to individually decide for or against the intervention." }, { "id": 1498, "title": "Will Donald Trump appoint at least one more Justice to the Supreme Court before the end of his presidency?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-donald-trump-appoint-at-least-one-more-justice-to-the-supreme-court-before-the-end-of-his-presidency", "author_id": 103634, "author_username": "AngraMainyu", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-08T03:28:44.424625Z", "published_at": "2018-10-12T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:19.335868Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-12T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 27, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2020-01-01T03:00:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2020-01-01T03:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2020-10-27T00:48:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2020-10-27T00:48:00Z", "open_time": "2018-10-12T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 129, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32593, "name": "2016-2020 Leaderboard", "slug": "2016_2020_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3689, "name": "Politics", "slug": "politics", "emoji": "🏛️", "description": "Politics", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1498, "title": "Will Donald Trump appoint at least one more Justice to the Supreme Court before the end of his presidency?", "created_at": "2018-10-08T03:28:44.424625Z", "open_time": "2018-10-12T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-12T20:51:36.947879Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-12T20:51:36.947879Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2020-10-27T00:48:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2020-10-27T00:48:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2020-10-27T00:48:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2020-01-01T03:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2020-01-01T03:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "yes", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "So far, Trump appointed two Justices to the SCOTUS - Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh -, and there are no vacancies. However, there is a good chance that Republicans will maintain control of the Senate until 2020, and there might be a vacancy before then. For example, justice Thomas might decide to retire when he can be pretty sure that he will be replaced by a conservative. At 70, he is not particularly old for the court, but he might not want to risk having to wait for another Republican President, in case a Democrat wins in 2020. Another possibility would be the death of one of the justices. Moreover, Trump might be reelected in 2020, and Republicans might control the Senate for at least some time during his second term. \n\nSo, it is asked: Will Donald Trump appoint at least one more Justice to the Supreme Court before the end of his presidency? \n\nResolution is positive if the following two conditions obtain: \n\n1. Donald Trump sends the nomination of at least one new Supreme Court Justice to the Senate, the Senate approves the nomination, and the new Justice is sworn in. \n2. Donald Trump has been the President of the United States at all times from the moment this question opens to the moment he sends the nomination of Condition 1. \n\nFor the purposes of Condition 2., any situation in which Trump is temporarily not exercising his office (e.g., Cheney was Acting President when Bush had surgery) will not preclude a positive resolution, as long as he continues to be the President in the technical constitutional sense. \n\nResolution is negative if a positive resolution is no longer constitutionally possible (in practice, at most a year after the end of Trump's presidency, this will have resolved).", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1498, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1577836717.11638, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 129, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.45 ], "centers": [ 0.55 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.62 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1577836717.11638, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 129, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.45 ], "centers": [ 0.55 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.62 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.44999999999999996, 0.55 ], "means": [ 0.5221229171616514 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.43948005730892, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.022192913421098, 0.0, 3.1743686855278136e-05, 0.0, 0.0, 1.3025495224872223, 0.0, 0.02370560915263767, 0.0, 0.6680678481628474, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.05330810378227271, 0.0025474768392577253, 0.0, 0.2716478688597376, 0.0, 0.006067126933651114, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.10001535513187128, 0.4190654316068577, 0.0, 0.056555358878628725, 0.15397212320626444, 0.018309819771454683, 0.035133104594797376, 0.004711180847754763, 0.012806317289036051, 0.11161885388424365, 0.0, 2.6938880164643564, 0.8007940246326799, 0.36286070221757477, 0.0, 0.0, 0.4428097520286299, 0.0033427467086007147, 0.00023455588296053762, 0.3135558877649012, 0.07613257240268602, 3.0182087710110053, 2.2908737576466707, 0.0036491754352390277, 0.0, 0.0, 1.2596797818444534, 0.753195658084852, 0.9865986606154031, 0.5624253627383415, 0.001733146577529624, 0.31783320651676916, 8.62882871469968e-05, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.9541705221032324, 0.001141695322050572, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.11874550528078462, 0.6123419747042308, 0.007619260256521799, 0.0, 0.06357776831387188, 0.5389167425641611, 0.2841333089510901, 0.08894876744017317, 0.24770399114550953, 0.0, 0.0004924294753687684, 0.0, 0.0, 0.22077553883017495, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.11785829873437736, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.37320270677463996 ] ] }, "score_data": { "peer_score": 8.88127940956106, "coverage": 0.9999585965569084, "baseline_score": 26.349133543601724, "spot_peer_score": 69.04143108139462, "peer_archived_score": 8.88127940956106, "baseline_archived_score": 26.349133543601724, "spot_peer_archived_score": 69.04143108139462 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1574617713.792459, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 121, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1574617713.792459, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 121, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.699552164768977, 0.30044783523102303 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 22, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 312, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1497, "title": "Will the eventual consensus explanation of star KIC 8462852 variability be an intervening molecular cloud?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-the-eventual-consensus-explanation-of-star-kic-8462852-variability-be-an-intervening-molecular-cloud", "author_id": 103116, "author_username": "Uncle Jeff", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-07T22:50:20.235411Z", "published_at": "2019-08-13T22:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:29:26.027594Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2019-08-13T22:00:00Z", "comment_count": 10, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T08:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-01-01T08:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2019-08-13T22:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 38, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3699, "name": "Natural Sciences", "slug": "natural-sciences", "emoji": "🔬", "description": "Natural Sciences", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3695, "name": "Space", "slug": "space", "emoji": "🚀", "description": "Space", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1497, "title": "Will the eventual consensus explanation of star KIC 8462852 variability be an intervening molecular cloud?", "created_at": "2018-10-07T22:50:20.235411Z", "open_time": "2019-08-13T22:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2019-08-15T10:05:16.293876Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2019-08-15T10:05:16.293876Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-01-01T08:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T08:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2100-01-01T08:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "This star (aka \"Tabby's Star) has been puzzling us for a few years now. Its highly variable apparent magnitude doesn't fit the pattern for other variable stars or stars with eclipsing companions or transiting exoplanets. To date, the dips in brightness do not exhibit any periodicity at all. Even worse, the dips in the luminosity graphs are asymmetrical (gradual onset, sudden reset). For lots of background and prior Metaculus discussion, see [this question](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/467/) and [this one.](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/110/).\n\nMost attention has been aimed at eclipsing objects orbiting the star itself, and our prior questions had rather short time horizons.\n\nNow I put forward my own pet theory as a binary question with open-ended close: Until such time as the scientific community does a face-palm and says \"yeah, of course that's what it was!\", is the explanation some passing interstellar gas and/or dust?\n\nFrom [this paper](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.03505.pdf) here's a good summary of the molecular cloud conjecture:\n\n>7.2.\n>*An intervening molecular cloud*\n>\n>Alternatively, there might be a chance alignment with a localized molecular cloud (as opposed to an overdense filament or sheet).\n>\n>The Clemens & Barvainis (1988) catalog of small molecular clouds was selected optically based on examination of the POSS plates, and was sensitive to clouds smaller than 10′, typically down to ∼1′. Clemens et al. (1991) found that the mean radius of these clouds was 0.35 pc. The clouds in this catalog cluster near the Galactic plane presumably both because clouds are intrinsically more common there and because they are easier to identify in silhouette against the large number of stars there.\n>\n>A quiescent Bok globule 0.1 pc ≈20,000 au across and midway between Earth and Boyajian’s Star would have almost certainly escaped detection. It would have a radius of 40\", and examination of the POSS plates for Boyajian’s Star confirms that the star counts are too low in this region to clearly reveal such a small object, especially if some of the stars in the image were foreground to it and the globule were not spherical. Such high-latitude clouds exist: Getman et al. (2008) describe the \"mysterious” high Galactic latitude cloud CG12, which sits 200 pc above the plane at a distance of 550 pc (about the same distance as Boyajian’s Star).\n>\n>In this case, the secular dimming would be naturally explained by the changing line of sight to Boyajian’s Star through the cloud’s slowly varying radial column density profile,and the dips would then be explained by small-scale (sub-au) structure within the cloud.\n\nThis question resolves when a consensus is achieved, and it will retroactively close one year prior to the resolution date. From the earlier questions about this star's consensus explanation:\n\nWe'll use the following criteria to specify consensus. Let N be the number of refereed published journal papers that:\n\n- provide an explanation for the aperiodic dips seen in KIC 8462852, and\n \n- are cited by at least one published paper, or two preprints, supporting their explanation with additional analysis and/or data, and\n\n- are cited at least 5 times in total, and\n\n- are not cited by a published, refereed paper refuting or disputing the given explanation within a year following publication.\n\nIf N=1 we will consider a consensus to have been reached. If N>1, and if all of the explanations are qualitatively the same, i.e. involving the same essential physics and objects (e.g. \"Comet breakup\"), we will also consider consensus to have been reached. Otherwise, we will consider that consensus has not yet been reached.\n\nResolution will then be positive if an intervening, galactic molecular cloud / gas cloud / supernova remnant is the explanation. Resolution will be negative if the explanation is anything other than interstellar gas and dust in our line of sight (e.g. anything orbiting the star, or the star's intrinsic variability etc)", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1497, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1753900720.569066, "end_time": 1819474902.416596, "forecaster_count": 37, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.26 ], "centers": [ 0.38 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1753900720.569066, "end_time": 1819474902.416596, "forecaster_count": 37, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.26 ], "centers": [ 0.38 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.62, 0.38 ], "means": [ 0.4095144016660861 ], "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, 0.2761168848762875, 0.0, 0.03860646978477285, 0.0, 0.7773919346032045, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.14090675707744726, 0.9784334729729518, 0.551687215997781, 0.0, 0.5611378030498646, 0.0, 0.2230884754427727, 0.0, 0.0, 0.00938587886210713, 0.0, 0.810449930012056, 0.4532733525755623, 0.0, 1.345517552199786, 1.7130527459887679, 0.7969182286479667, 0.0, 0.3386586773479101, 0.0, 0.0, 0.016860822722490777, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.19976240866306647, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.5975016895580821, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.8464681131236458 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728288987.993446, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 38, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728288987.993446, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 38, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.8276064518056612, 0.17239354819433877 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 8, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 125, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" }, { "id": 1495, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?", "short_title": "GC to be caused by AI, if it occurs?", "url_title": "GC to be caused by AI, if it occurs?", "slug": "gc-to-be-caused-by-ai-if-it-occurs", "author_id": 104761, "author_username": "Tamay", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-07T21:40:22.666000Z", "published_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-16T20:15:08.224831Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 44, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-01-31T23:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 436, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "topic": [ { "id": 15869, "name": "Artificial Intelligence", "slug": "ai", "emoji": "🤖", "type": "topic" }, { "id": 15854, "name": "Top Questions", "slug": "top-50", "emoji": "✨🔝", "type": "topic" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "question_series": [ { "id": 1313, "type": "question_series", "name": "AI Progress Essay Contest", "slug": "ai-fortified-essay-contest", "header_image": "https://cdn.metaculus.com/neural_net.png", "prize_pool": "6500.00", "start_date": "2022-02-08T13:02:52Z", "close_date": "2022-04-16T15:54:55Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": { "description": "Welcome to the AI Progress Essay Contest! Metaculus aims to support accurate forecasting of and preparation for the impacts of transformative AI.\r\n\r\nThank you for your participation!" }, "is_ongoing": false, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-24T01:32:31.710216Z", "score_type": "relative_legacy_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, { "id": 2342, "type": "question_series", "name": "AGI Outcomes", "slug": "agi-horizons", "header_image": "https://cdn.metaculus.com/agi.png", "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2023-08-09T13:41:42.701000Z", "close_date": "2023-08-09T13:41:42.701000Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": false, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-24T03:14:36.925819Z", "score_type": "relative_legacy_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3692, "name": "Computing and Math", "slug": "computing-and-math", "emoji": "💻", "description": "Computing and Math", "type": "category" }, { "id": 3694, "name": "Artificial Intelligence", "slug": "artificial-intelligence", "emoji": "🤖", "description": "Artificial Intelligence", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1495, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?", "created_at": "2018-10-07T21:40:22.666000Z", "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-14T20:17:31.593000Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-14T20:17:31.593000Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-01-31T23:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\nCurrently, artificial intelligence can outperform humans in a number of narrow domains, such as playing chess and searching data. As artificial intelligence researchers continue to make progress, though, these domains are highly likely to grow in number and breadth over time. Many experts now believe there is a significant chance that a machine superintelligence – a system that can outperform humans at all relevant intelligence tasks – will be developed within the next century, and possibly much sooner.\n\nIn a [2017 survey of artificial intelligence experts](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.08807.pdf), the median expert estimated that there is a 50% chance of human-level artificial intelligence by 2062, and after this milestone were reached, respondents reported a 10% chance that superintelligence would be achieved within two years. [Our very own question on the prospect of human-machine intelligence parity by 2040](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/384/human-machine-intelligence-parity-by-2040/) currently has a median prediction of 60%. In another question on the possibility of progress toward human-machine intelligence parity surprising us, a similar median estimate is given.\n\nIn the aforementioned survey, experts were asked about the effects of human level machine intelligence. They assigned a 10% for a bad outcome and 5% for an outcome described as “Extremely Bad (e.g., human extinction).” Although a selection bias, large variance in responses (reflecting vast uncertainty), and the unreliability of subjective opinions mean that these estimates warrant skepticism, they nevertheless suggest that the possibility of superintelligence ought to be taken seriously.\n\nWhen considering how AI might become a risk, experts think two scenarios most likely (according to the [Future of Life Institute](https://futureoflife.org/background/benefits-risks-of-artificial-intelligence/)) \n\n> 1. The AI is programmed to do something devastating: Autonomous weapons are artificial intelligence systems that are programmed to kill. In the hands of the wrong person, these weapons could easily cause mass casualties. Moreover, an AI arms race could inadvertently lead to an AI war that also results in mass casualties. To avoid being thwarted by the enemy, these weapons would be designed to be extremely difficult to simply “turn off,” so humans could plausibly lose control of such a situation. This risk is one that’s present even with narrow AI, but grows as levels of AI intelligence and autonomy increase. \n> 2. The AI is programmed to do something beneficial, but it develops a destructive method for achieving its goal: This can happen whenever we fail to fully align the AI’s goals with ours, which is strikingly difficult. If you ask an obedient intelligent car to take you to the airport as fast as possible, it might get you there chased by helicopters and covered in vomit, doing not what you wanted but literally what you asked for. If a superintelligent system is tasked with a ambitious geoengineering project, it might wreak havoc with our ecosystem as a side effect, and view human attempts to stop it as a threat to be met. As these examples illustrate, the concern about advanced AI isn’t malevolence but competence. A super-intelligent AI will be extremely good at accomplishing its goals, and if those goals aren’t aligned with ours, we have a problem. You’re probably not an evil ant-hater who steps on ants out of malice, but if you’re in charge of a hydroelectric green energy project and there’s an anthill in the region to be flooded, too bad for the ants.\n\nIn the [headline question](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/) to this series, I defined a global catastrophe as a 10% decrease in the world population in any period of 5 years.\n\nThis question is part of the Ragnarök Question Series. Check out the other questions in the series:\n\n1. [If a global biological catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2514/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-biological-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n2. [If an artificial intelligence catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2513/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-an-artificial-intelligence-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n3. [If a nuclear catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1585/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-nuclear-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n4. [If a global climate disaster occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1604/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-climate-disaster-occurs-by-2100-will-the-earths-human-population-decline-by-95-or-more/)\n\n5. [If a global nanotechnology catastrophe occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/7795/)\n\nAlso, please check out our questions on whether a global catastrophe will occur by 2100, and if so, which?:\n\n6. [By 2100 will the human population decrease by at least 10% during any period of 5 years?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/)\n\n7. [Will such a catastrophe be due to either human-made climate change or geoengineering?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1500/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-either-human-made-climate-change-or-geoengineering/)\n\n8. [Will such a catastrophe be due to a nanotechnology failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1501/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nanotechnology-failure-mode/)\n\n9. [Will such a catastrophe be due to nuclear war?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1494/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nuclear-war/)\n\n10. [Will such a catastrophe be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1495/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-an-artificial-intelligence-failure-mode/)\n\n11. [Will such a catastrophe be due to biotechnology or bioengineered organisms?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1502/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-biotechnology-or-bioengineered-organisms/)\n\nAll results [are analysed here](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2568/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-results-so-far/), and will be updated periodically.", "resolution_criteria": "The question resolves **Yes** if a catastrophe occurs resulting principally from the deployment of some artificial intelligence system(s) that claims at least 10% of the human population in any period of 5 years or less before 2100. It resolves **No** if this occurs for non-AI reasons, and **Annulled** if no global catastrophe occurs. Years are here defined as consecutive calendar years.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1495, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1763324097.975887, "end_time": 1788170395.543, "forecaster_count": 434, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.15 ], "centers": [ 0.3 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.7 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1763324097.975887, "end_time": 1788170395.543, "forecaster_count": 434, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.15 ], "centers": [ 0.3 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.7 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.7, 0.3 ], "means": [ 0.3875090332617165 ], "histogram": [ [ 1.3083318909134825, 1.4740169349646197, 0.19870353548307368, 0.363162453593026, 0.0851464071590998, 1.7963851401898332, 0.12960729953792038, 0.37450350269975413, 0.505824601218526, 0.2136299271008057, 2.1391883424937426, 0.02150370359901319, 0.6622654647064274, 0.2533054610765446, 0.005736769442451981, 1.714554389538995, 0.9292570938908263, 0.7884801119694582, 0.004736609106031649, 0.43518115602027485, 1.4447952230498853, 1.1379545851798047, 0.005883173833539093, 0.00040819586796598655, 0.6961850593091365, 1.0795785939593132, 0.016211191326611037, 0.5714074711656916, 0.9667342317929817, 0.0, 1.597896126423767, 0.029344489665910703, 0.2917500894288513, 0.6808328224824132, 0.7376046335628477, 1.8177554325444651, 0.005449849397438324, 2.785254472563281e-05, 2.4067994507492364e-05, 0.0017765519690961383, 1.4809215862800178, 0.005150076711908947, 0.6088567371700652, 0.116353191001099, 5.535155798105707e-08, 0.624145812461347, 0.0008376254025114091, 0.0, 0.060512200163520755, 0.0, 0.3060263660072296, 0.0, 0.0020916786420111786, 0.0, 0.0, 0.4127512983606626, 0.0, 0.000228776032269881, 0.0, 0.0, 0.9677886758133568, 0.0018876041917477984, 0.0011994038031788, 0.0, 0.026950872566963158, 0.02972269623411278, 0.08647582834881215, 8.386868077253612e-09, 0.0, 0.026891595011028745, 2.617415856084479, 0.0, 0.0, 0.014270758374624439, 1.9553980954486232e-07, 2.384683878176273, 0.001644265409389813, 0.0, 0.8688034330972974, 0.004348769542626762, 0.11737564289625965, 0.0, 0.0, 0.01619625030290069, 0.027351641971762826, 0.8376310010580555, 0.0, 0.0, 0.007965252332173881, 0.0, 1.1680823471980026, 0.0, 0.0, 0.01658195174030414, 0.003574312237620356, 0.17807448248867483, 1.1321037115091788, 0.0027408638544299648, 0.0, 1.5245562225932408 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728289638.855918, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 370, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728289638.855918, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 370, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.7161457287746186, 0.2838542712253814 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 36, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 905, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\nCurrently, artificial intelligence can outperform humans in a number of narrow domains, such as playing chess and searching data. As artificial intelligence researchers continue to make progress, though, these domains are highly likely to grow in number and breadth over time. Many experts now believe there is a significant chance that a machine superintelligence – a system that can outperform humans at all relevant intelligence tasks – will be developed within the next century, and possibly much sooner.\n\nIn a [2017 survey of artificial intelligence experts](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.08807.pdf), the median expert estimated that there is a 50% chance of human-level artificial intelligence by 2062, and after this milestone were reached, respondents reported a 10% chance that superintelligence would be achieved within two years. [Our very own question on the prospect of human-machine intelligence parity by 2040](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/384/human-machine-intelligence-parity-by-2040/) currently has a median prediction of 60%. In another question on the possibility of progress toward human-machine intelligence parity surprising us, a similar median estimate is given.\n\nIn the aforementioned survey, experts were asked about the effects of human level machine intelligence. They assigned a 10% for a bad outcome and 5% for an outcome described as “Extremely Bad (e.g., human extinction).” Although a selection bias, large variance in responses (reflecting vast uncertainty), and the unreliability of subjective opinions mean that these estimates warrant skepticism, they nevertheless suggest that the possibility of superintelligence ought to be taken seriously.\n\nWhen considering how AI might become a risk, experts think two scenarios most likely (according to the [Future of Life Institute](https://futureoflife.org/background/benefits-risks-of-artificial-intelligence/)) \n\n> 1. The AI is programmed to do something devastating: Autonomous weapons are artificial intelligence systems that are programmed to kill. In the hands of the wrong person, these weapons could easily cause mass casualties. Moreover, an AI arms race could inadvertently lead to an AI war that also results in mass casualties. To avoid being thwarted by the enemy, these weapons would be designed to be extremely difficult to simply “turn off,” so humans could plausibly lose control of such a situation. This risk is one that’s present even with narrow AI, but grows as levels of AI intelligence and autonomy increase. \n> 2. The AI is programmed to do something beneficial, but it develops a destructive method for achieving its goal: This can happen whenever we fail to fully align the AI’s goals with ours, which is strikingly difficult. If you ask an obedient intelligent car to take you to the airport as fast as possible, it might get you there chased by helicopters and covered in vomit, doing not what you wanted but literally what you asked for. If a superintelligent system is tasked with a ambitious geoengineering project, it might wreak havoc with our ecosystem as a side effect, and view human attempts to stop it as a threat to be met. As these examples illustrate, the concern about advanced AI isn’t malevolence but competence. A super-intelligent AI will be extremely good at accomplishing its goals, and if those goals aren’t aligned with ours, we have a problem. You’re probably not an evil ant-hater who steps on ants out of malice, but if you’re in charge of a hydroelectric green energy project and there’s an anthill in the region to be flooded, too bad for the ants.\n\nIn the [headline question](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/) to this series, I defined a global catastrophe as a 10% decrease in the world population in any period of 5 years.\n\nThis question is part of the Ragnarök Question Series. Check out the other questions in the series:\n\n1. [If a global biological catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2514/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-biological-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n2. [If an artificial intelligence catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2513/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-an-artificial-intelligence-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n3. [If a nuclear catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1585/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-nuclear-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n4. [If a global climate disaster occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1604/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-climate-disaster-occurs-by-2100-will-the-earths-human-population-decline-by-95-or-more/)\n\n5. [If a global nanotechnology catastrophe occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/7795/)\n\nAlso, please check out our questions on whether a global catastrophe will occur by 2100, and if so, which?:\n\n6. [By 2100 will the human population decrease by at least 10% during any period of 5 years?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/)\n\n7. [Will such a catastrophe be due to either human-made climate change or geoengineering?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1500/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-either-human-made-climate-change-or-geoengineering/)\n\n8. [Will such a catastrophe be due to a nanotechnology failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1501/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nanotechnology-failure-mode/)\n\n9. [Will such a catastrophe be due to nuclear war?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1494/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nuclear-war/)\n\n10. [Will such a catastrophe be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1495/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-an-artificial-intelligence-failure-mode/)\n\n11. [Will such a catastrophe be due to biotechnology or bioengineered organisms?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1502/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-biotechnology-or-bioengineered-organisms/)\n\nAll results [are analysed here](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2568/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-results-so-far/), and will be updated periodically." }, { "id": 1494, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to nuclear war?", "short_title": "GC to be caused by nuclear war, if it occurs?", "url_title": "GC to be caused by nuclear war, if it occurs?", "slug": "gc-to-be-caused-by-nuclear-war-if-it-occurs", "author_id": 104761, "author_username": "Tamay", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-07T21:11:51.836277Z", "published_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-24T05:40:33.726465Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 15, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 282, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "topic": [ { "id": 15868, "name": "Nuclear Technology & Risks", "slug": "nuclear", "emoji": "☣️", "type": "topic" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "category": [ { "id": 3690, "name": "Nuclear Technology & Risks", "slug": "nuclear", "emoji": "☢️", "description": "Nuclear Technology & Risks", "type": "category" } ], "question_series": [ { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } }, "question": { "id": 1494, "title": "Ragnarök Question Series: If a global catastrophe occurs, will it be due to nuclear war?", "created_at": "2018-10-07T21:11:51.836277Z", "open_time": "2018-10-13T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-14T12:33:03.176000Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-14T12:33:03.176000Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2100-01-01T23:59:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\n\nThe invention of nuclear weapons gave humanity the technical capacity to cause devastation on a hitherto unseen scale. Although there have been no nuclear attacks since the Second World War, we have come close to inadvertent and intentional nuclear war on a number of occasions.\n\nThe Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 was a direct and dangerous confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War and was the moment when the two nuclear superpowers came closest to nuclear conflict. U.S. president John F. Kennedy estimated the odds of nuclear war at \"somewhere between one out of three and even\". \n\nTwenty events that might be considered ‘near-miss’ incidents – incidents that could potentially have resulted in unintended nuclear detonation or explosion – [have been reported in declassified documents](https://futureoflife.org/background/nuclear-close-calls-a-timeline/). There are potentially more ‘near-misses’ that have remained classified and concealed. Moreover, most of these incidents on our timeline were reported by US sources, and there is no reason to believe that the opposing superpower had fewer incidents, or that there have been zero incidents in China, the UK, France, Israel, India, Pakistan or North Korea. \n\nCurrently, there are [an estimated total of 14,185 nuclear weapons](https://www.ploughshares.org/world-nuclear-stockpile-report) in existence, of which russia and the USA possess 13400. The remained is divided between (in descending order of number of weapons possessed) France, China, UK, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea.\n\nAlthough tensions between the US and Russia have eased somewhat since the Cold War the geopolitical situation could become more unstable over the next few decades. Another possible intentional nuclear war is between India and Pakistan. The two countries have gone to war four times since then, in 1947, 1965, 1974 and 1999, and have been on the brink of war as recently as 2008. Pakistan has pledged to meet any Indian attack on its territory with a retaliatory nuclear strike. Most recently, the world has witnessed displays of brinkmanship by North Korea and the US with explicit threats of nuclear warfare.\n\nAlthough initial effects from such a nuclear exchange would be horrible, the after-effects could be worse. A nuclear exchange could cause a [nuclear winter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter) – a release of black carbon into the atmosphere. [According to some studies](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2013EF000205), this would result in the blocking the Sun’s thermal energy, and lowering temperatures regionally and globally for several years, opening up new holes in the ozone layer protecting the Earth from harmful radiation, reducing global precipitation by about 10%, triggering crop failures, and resulting in widespread food shortages\n\n[Recent calculations](https://academic.oup.com/isr/article/6/4/135/1826263) of the dust, particulates and smoke thrust into the atmosphere by as few as 100 nuclear weapons indicate that even a regional war could have major impact on the planet’s atmosphere and climate.\n\nThe fact that we’ve never had a mass-casualty accidental nuclear detonation or explosion might suggest that some estimates of the odds of nuclear war –such as John F. Kennedy’s– are too gloomy. [Others have pointed out that the strength of this evidence is perhaps surprisingly weak](https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/W6-Observer-selection-effects.pdf): if nuclear war removes many observers, then realizations of world history we see are unlikely to have included nuclear war. Hence observers in surviving worlds will see the world to be much safer than it actually is.", "resolution_criteria": "In the [headline question](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/) to this series, I defined a global catastrophe as a 10% decrease in the world population in any period of 5 years.\n\n**If a global catastrophe happens before 2100, will it be principally due to the deployment of nuclear weapons?**\n\nThe question resolves positively if a global nuclear catastrophe occurs that claims at least 10% in any period of 5 years or less before 2100, and resolves as ambiguous if no such global catastrophe happens. Years are here defined as consecutive calendar years.", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1494, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1758692423.030618, "end_time": 1783978131.845, "forecaster_count": 280, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.14 ], "centers": [ 0.29 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1758692423.030618, "end_time": 1783978131.845, "forecaster_count": 280, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.14 ], "centers": [ 0.29 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.4 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.71, 0.29 ], "means": [ 0.33621140255514376 ], "histogram": [ [ 0.0, 0.30815131348475, 0.1396833127520043, 0.3082477782530437, 0.0011325017451745277, 1.3100358602190902, 0.0, 0.0, 0.5507926593307708, 0.38664103447050396, 4.303411720077918, 7.619009934043632e-07, 0.4660206090353108, 0.020212854489362463, 0.5262351844202406, 1.7026212283492428, 0.0, 0.3775490628734801, 0.08334332949574674, 0.9244460555758998, 0.7519290337216631, 0.00021247075779388735, 2.5044651185260247, 0.4111235151101181, 0.01060173320449754, 0.39555184642351915, 0.04870900638869065, 0.1677491510062921, 0.6963596761854853, 0.2709145259800061, 0.7639856674730032, 0.28901775815573155, 0.2378435938821052, 0.3741702406924071, 0.08696106076752655, 2.06362426435951, 0.5870225216096309, 0.004795025632778362, 0.42753756834977796, 0.37126734318755916, 2.5793108283948567, 0.09257013483910195, 0.534272087998515, 0.024852530011940883, 0.0030925806321730367, 0.2626543921992471, 0.0, 1.4694601967803305e-07, 4.73246392987905e-06, 0.0, 0.2634183948288295, 0.1099904775848267, 9.761659824870731e-06, 0.0, 0.2622985869604335, 0.005513046327939703, 1.073825553964598e-05, 0.0, 0.0, 0.18958558689659818, 0.03800684861399579, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.9361779875261249, 0.013218043459217513, 0.0, 0.23018705725067296, 0.0, 0.1449268070080213, 0.08626393476775336, 0.0013152933053637795, 0.9705353600174228, 0.0, 0.5440658269171128, 0.8606420668747926, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.24592809024529422, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 6.261281415088588e-07, 0.03241720965427899, 2.9514897039585944e-06, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.6652526403847983 ] ] }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728287817.81163, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 244, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728287817.81163, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 244, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.8547310320159497, 0.14526896798405034 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 28, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 560, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\n\nThe invention of nuclear weapons gave humanity the technical capacity to cause devastation on a hitherto unseen scale. Although there have been no nuclear attacks since the Second World War, we have come close to inadvertent and intentional nuclear war on a number of occasions.\n\nThe Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 was a direct and dangerous confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War and was the moment when the two nuclear superpowers came closest to nuclear conflict. U.S. president John F. Kennedy estimated the odds of nuclear war at \"somewhere between one out of three and even\". \n\nTwenty events that might be considered ‘near-miss’ incidents – incidents that could potentially have resulted in unintended nuclear detonation or explosion – [have been reported in declassified documents](https://futureoflife.org/background/nuclear-close-calls-a-timeline/). There are potentially more ‘near-misses’ that have remained classified and concealed. Moreover, most of these incidents on our timeline were reported by US sources, and there is no reason to believe that the opposing superpower had fewer incidents, or that there have been zero incidents in China, the UK, France, Israel, India, Pakistan or North Korea. \n\nCurrently, there are [an estimated total of 14,185 nuclear weapons](https://www.ploughshares.org/world-nuclear-stockpile-report) in existence, of which russia and the USA possess 13400. The remained is divided between (in descending order of number of weapons possessed) France, China, UK, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea.\n\nAlthough tensions between the US and Russia have eased somewhat since the Cold War the geopolitical situation could become more unstable over the next few decades. Another possible intentional nuclear war is between India and Pakistan. The two countries have gone to war four times since then, in 1947, 1965, 1974 and 1999, and have been on the brink of war as recently as 2008. Pakistan has pledged to meet any Indian attack on its territory with a retaliatory nuclear strike. Most recently, the world has witnessed displays of brinkmanship by North Korea and the US with explicit threats of nuclear warfare.\n\nAlthough initial effects from such a nuclear exchange would be horrible, the after-effects could be worse. A nuclear exchange could cause a [nuclear winter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter) – a release of black carbon into the atmosphere. [According to some studies](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2013EF000205), this would result in the blocking the Sun’s thermal energy, and lowering temperatures regionally and globally for several years, opening up new holes in the ozone layer protecting the Earth from harmful radiation, reducing global precipitation by about 10%, triggering crop failures, and resulting in widespread food shortages\n\n[Recent calculations](https://academic.oup.com/isr/article/6/4/135/1826263) of the dust, particulates and smoke thrust into the atmosphere by as few as 100 nuclear weapons indicate that even a regional war could have major impact on the planet’s atmosphere and climate.\n\nThe fact that we’ve never had a mass-casualty accidental nuclear detonation or explosion might suggest that some estimates of the odds of nuclear war –such as John F. Kennedy’s– are too gloomy. [Others have pointed out that the strength of this evidence is perhaps surprisingly weak](https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/W6-Observer-selection-effects.pdf): if nuclear war removes many observers, then realizations of world history we see are unlikely to have included nuclear war. Hence observers in surviving worlds will see the world to be much safer than it actually is." }, { "id": 1493, "title": "By 2100, will the human population decrease by at least 10% during any period of 5 years?", "short_title": "Global Population Decline >10% by 2100", "url_title": "Global Population Decline >10% by 2100", "slug": "global-population-decline-10-by-2100", "author_id": 104761, "author_username": "Tamay", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-07T20:41:43.149579Z", "published_at": "2018-10-11T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-10-22T09:14:44.133930Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-11T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 23, "status": "open", "resolved": false, "actual_close_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T00:00:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-01-02T23:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "open_time": "2018-10-11T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 413, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "question_series": [ { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 2932, "type": "question_series", "name": "Ragnarök Series", "slug": "ragnarok-series", "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": "2018-09-19T12:47:21Z", "close_date": "2100-01-05T13:47:21Z", "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": true, "user_permission": null, "created_at": "2024-02-15T13:47:21.479124Z", "edited_at": "2025-11-18T02:55:08.533483Z", "score_type": "peer_tournament", "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "topic": [ { "id": 15854, "name": "Top Questions", "slug": "top-50", "emoji": "✨🔝", "type": "topic" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1493, "title": "By 2100, will the human population decrease by at least 10% during any period of 5 years?", "created_at": "2018-10-07T20:41:43.149579Z", "open_time": "2018-10-11T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-12T17:39:00Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-12T17:39:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2100-01-02T23:00:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": null, "resolution_set_time": null, "scheduled_close_time": "2100-01-01T00:00:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2100-01-01T00:00:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": [], "group_variable": "", "status": "open", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": null, "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\nIt’s dangerous to be alive and risks are everywhere. But not all risks are created equally. Those that are especially large in scope and severe in intensity are global catastrophic risks, which are risks that could inflict serious damage to human well-being on a global scale.\n \nUntil relatively recently, most global catastrophic risks were natural, such as the supervolcano episodes and asteroidal/cometary impacts that led to mass extinctions millions of years ago. Other natural risks might include a pandemic of naturally occurring disease, non-anthropogenic climate change, supernovae, gamma-ray bursts, and spontaneous decay of cosmic vacuum state. Humanity has survived these natural existential risks for hundreds of thousands of years; which suggests that it is not any of these that will do us in within the next hundred.\n\nBy contrast, through technological advances, our species is introducing entirely new kinds of risks, anthropogenic risks, which are man-made threats that have no track record of surviving. Our longevity as a species therefore offers no strong prior grounds for confident optimism. Examples of anthropogenic risks are nuclear war, advanced artificial intelligence, biotechnology and bioengineered organisms, human-made climate change and nanotechnology risks.\n\nThere are two complementary ways of estimating the chances of catastrophe. What we could call the direct way is to analyze the various specific failure-modes, assign them probabilities, which is what--at least partially-- the questions in the Ragnarök series are designed to do.\n\nSecondly, there is the indirect way. [As Nick Bostrom has argued](https://nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html), there are theoretical constraints that can be brought to bear on the issue, based on some general features of the world in which we live. There is only small number of these, but they are important because they do not rely on making a lot of guesses about the details of future technological and social developments. For example, the so-called [Doomsday argument](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_argument), which purports to show that we have systematically underestimated the probability that humankind will go extinct relatively soon.\n\nMoreover, the [Fermi Paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox) tells us that it is not the case that life evolves on a significant fraction of Earth-like planets and proceeds to develop advanced technology. Hence, there must be (at least) one Great Filter – an evolutionary step that is extremely improbable – somewhere on the line between Earth-like planet and colonizing-in-detectable-ways civilization. If the [Great Filter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter) isn’t in our past, we must fear it in our (near) future.", "resolution_criteria": "This question will resolve as **Yes** if the human population (on Earth, and possibly elsewhere) decreases by at least 10% in any period of 5 years or less. Years are here defined as consecutive calendar years.\n\n-------\n<small>\n\nThis question is part of the Ragnarök Question Series. Check out the other questions in the series:\n\n1. [If a global biological catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2514/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-biological-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n2. [If an artificial intelligence catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2513/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-an-artificial-intelligence-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n3. [If a nuclear catastrophe occurs, will it reduce the human population by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1585/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-nuclear-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-reduce-the-human-population-by-95-or-more/)\n\n4. [If a global climate disaster occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1604/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-climate-disaster-occurs-by-2100-will-the-earths-human-population-decline-by-95-or-more/)\n\n5. [If a global nanotechnology catastrophe occurs by 2100, will the human population decline by 95% or more?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/7795/)\n\nAlso, please check out our questions on whether a global catastrophe will occur by 2100, and if so, which?:\n\n6. [By 2100 will the human population decrease by at least 10% during any period of 5 years?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1493/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-by-2100-will-the-human-population-decrease-by-at-least-10-during-any-period-of-5-years/)\n\n7. [Will such a catastrophe be due to either human-made climate change or geoengineering?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1500/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-either-human-made-climate-change-or-geoengineering/)\n\n8. [Will such a catastrophe be due to a nanotechnology failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1501/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nanotechnology-failure-mode/)\n\n9. [Will such a catastrophe be due to nuclear war?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1494/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-nuclear-war/)\n\n10. [Will such a catastrophe be due to an artificial intelligence failure-mode?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1495/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-an-artificial-intelligence-failure-mode/)\n\n11. [Will such a catastrophe be due to biotechnology or bioengineered organisms?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1502/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-if-a-global-catastrophe-occurs-will-it-be-due-to-biotechnology-or-bioengineered-organisms/)\n\nAll results [are analysed here](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/2568/ragnar%25C3%25B6k-question-series-results-so-far/), and will be updated periodically.\n\n</small>", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1493, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1761124473.558933, "end_time": 1783150291.516, "forecaster_count": 411, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.12 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.6 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1761124473.558933, "end_time": 1783150291.516, "forecaster_count": 411, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.12 ], "centers": [ 0.35 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.6 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.65, 0.35 ], "means": [ 0.3824853056776995 ], "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1728289542.253129, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 349, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1728289542.253129, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 349, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.7760905931320081, 0.22390940686799182 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 60, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 872, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "*You can now see an excellent visualization of global catastrophic risks estimates produced in the Ragnarök series [here](https://possibleworldstree.com/).*\n\nIt’s dangerous to be alive and risks are everywhere. But not all risks are created equally. Those that are especially large in scope and severe in intensity are global catastrophic risks, which are risks that could inflict serious damage to human well-being on a global scale.\n \nUntil relatively recently, most global catastrophic risks were natural, such as the supervolcano episodes and asteroidal/cometary impacts that led to mass extinctions millions of years ago. Other natural risks might include a pandemic of naturally occurring disease, non-anthropogenic climate change, supernovae, gamma-ray bursts, and spontaneous decay of cosmic vacuum state. Humanity has survived these natural existential risks for hundreds of thousands of years; which suggests that it is not any of these that will do us in within the next hundred.\n\nBy contrast, through technological advances, our species is introducing entirely new kinds of risks, anthropogenic risks, which are man-made threats that have no track record of surviving. Our longevity as a species therefore offers no strong prior grounds for confident optimism. Examples of anthropogenic risks are nuclear war, advanced artificial intelligence, biotechnology and bioengineered organisms, human-made climate change and nanotechnology risks.\n\nThere are two complementary ways of estimating the chances of catastrophe. What we could call the direct way is to analyze the various specific failure-modes, assign them probabilities, which is what--at least partially-- the questions in the Ragnarök series are designed to do.\n\nSecondly, there is the indirect way. [As Nick Bostrom has argued](https://nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.html), there are theoretical constraints that can be brought to bear on the issue, based on some general features of the world in which we live. There is only small number of these, but they are important because they do not rely on making a lot of guesses about the details of future technological and social developments. For example, the so-called [Doomsday argument](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_argument), which purports to show that we have systematically underestimated the probability that humankind will go extinct relatively soon.\n\nMoreover, the [Fermi Paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox) tells us that it is not the case that life evolves on a significant fraction of Earth-like planets and proceeds to develop advanced technology. Hence, there must be (at least) one Great Filter – an evolutionary step that is extremely improbable – somewhere on the line between Earth-like planet and colonizing-in-detectable-ways civilization. If the [Great Filter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter) isn’t in our past, we must fear it in our (near) future." }, { "id": 1483, "title": "Will the U.S. Senate vote on the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh before Monday, October the 8th?", "short_title": "", "url_title": "", "slug": "will-the-us-senate-vote-on-the-confirmation-of-brett-kavanaugh-before-monday-october-the-8th", "author_id": 103275, "author_username": "christian", "coauthors": [], "created_at": "2018-10-03T22:15:17.934663Z", "published_at": "2018-10-03T07:00:00Z", "edited_at": "2025-09-05T17:28:51.805546Z", "curation_status": "approved", "curation_status_updated_at": "2018-10-03T07:00:00Z", "comment_count": 7, "status": "resolved", "resolved": true, "actual_close_time": "2018-10-06T03:59:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2018-10-06T03:59:00Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2018-10-06T21:16:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2018-10-06T21:16:00Z", "open_time": "2018-10-03T07:00:00Z", "nr_forecasters": 46, "html_metadata_json": null, "projects": { "leaderboard_tag": [ { "id": 32599, "name": "2018 Leaderboard", "slug": "2018_leaderboard", "type": "leaderboard_tag" } ], "site_main": [ { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" } ], "default_project": { "id": 144, "type": "site_main", "name": "Metaculus Community", "slug": null, "header_image": null, "prize_pool": null, "start_date": null, "close_date": null, "forecasting_end_date": null, "html_metadata_json": null, "is_ongoing": null, "user_permission": "forecaster", "created_at": "2023-11-08T16:55:29.484707Z", "edited_at": "2025-07-18T17:28:18.838588Z", "score_type": null, "default_permission": "forecaster", "visibility": "normal", "is_current_content_translated": false, "bot_leaderboard_status": "exclude_and_show" }, "category": [ { "id": 3689, "name": "Politics", "slug": "politics", "emoji": "🏛️", "description": "Politics", "type": "category" } ] }, "question": { "id": 1483, "title": "Will the U.S. Senate vote on the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh before Monday, October the 8th?", "created_at": "2018-10-03T22:15:17.934663Z", "open_time": "2018-10-03T07:00:00Z", "cp_reveal_time": "2018-10-04T05:01:43.085696Z", "spot_scoring_time": "2018-10-04T05:01:43.085696Z", "scheduled_resolve_time": "2018-10-06T21:16:00Z", "actual_resolve_time": "2018-10-06T21:16:00Z", "resolution_set_time": "2018-10-06T21:16:00Z", "scheduled_close_time": "2018-10-06T03:59:00Z", "actual_close_time": "2018-10-06T03:59:00Z", "type": "binary", "options": null, "group_variable": "", "status": "resolved", "possibilities": { "type": "binary" }, "resolution": "yes", "include_bots_in_aggregates": false, "question_weight": 1.0, "default_score_type": "peer", "default_aggregation_method": "recency_weighted", "label": "", "unit": "", "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "scaling": { "range_min": null, "range_max": null, "nominal_min": null, "nominal_max": null, "zero_point": null, "open_upper_bound": null, "open_lower_bound": null, "inbound_outcome_count": null, "continuous_range": null }, "group_rank": null, "description": "", "resolution_criteria": "Metaculus previously asked [Will a new US Supreme Court Justice be approved in 2018?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1010/will-a-new-us-supreme-court-justice-be-approved-in-2018/) and [How many Senate Democrats will vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court?](https://www.metaculus.com/questions/1374/how-many-senate-democrats-will-vote-to-confirm-brett-kavanaugh-to-the-supreme-court/).\n\nPredict here on whether the Senate vote will take place by the start of Monday. Resolves positive if so, negative if no vote takes place for whatever reason.\n\nOnce the FBI completes its investigation, the White House sends the report to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and senators vote on the motion to end debate, there can be an up or down vote. If Mitch McConnell orders the Senate to work over the weekend, this vote could happen as early as Saturday afternoon. \n\n**This question resolves positive if the Senate votes on the confirmation of Kavanaugh prior to Monday the 8th, EDT.**", "fine_print": "", "post_id": 1483, "aggregations": { "recency_weighted": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1538789478.588489, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 46, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.7 ], "centers": [ 0.91 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.95 ] } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1538789478.588489, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 46, "interval_lower_bounds": [ 0.7 ], "centers": [ 0.91 ], "interval_upper_bounds": [ 0.95 ], "forecast_values": [ 0.08999999999999997, 0.91 ], "means": [ 0.8459538475728509 ], "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, 0.0030815271309911525, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.013130201551318676, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.18575801079970408, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.004662905996750363, 0.11083038735431396, 0.047802726739546664, 0.0, 0.0, 0.32449805599287956, 0.06089953052408157, 0.0, 0.07889090770323962, 0.0, 0.0, 0.539066693473018, 0.6326900287523809, 0.9565244364793786, 0.0, 0.0, 0.1990690359159601, 0.0, 0.0, 0.02678127518047141, 0.12345059748575654, 0.47784058415661046, 0.0, 0.010606778452136844, 0.0, 0.0, 0.7676357777506084, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.09277207444558866, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.9648280528088361, 0.8526504654721225, 0.0, 0.29683892709897775, 0.4573391763706963, 2.232088698522083, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.6124790027169205 ] ] }, "score_data": { "peer_score": 13.781265358115975, "coverage": 0.7470213264037302, "baseline_score": 35.96569985472462, "spot_peer_score": 48.86825017150474, "peer_archived_score": 13.781265358115975, "baseline_archived_score": 35.96569985472462, "spot_peer_archived_score": 48.86825017150474 }, "movement": null }, "metaculus_prediction": { "history": [ { "start_time": 1538789478.619382, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 46, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null } ], "latest": { "start_time": 1538789478.619382, "end_time": null, "forecaster_count": 46, "interval_lower_bounds": null, "centers": null, "interval_upper_bounds": null, "forecast_values": [ 0.10921716779633639, 0.8907828322036636 ], "means": null, "histogram": null }, "score_data": {}, "movement": null } } }, "user_permission": "forecaster", "vote": { "score": 4, "user_vote": null }, "forecasts_count": 114, "key_factors": [], "is_current_content_translated": false, "description": "" } ] }
\n\nWill](http://1980-2016](https://www.bjs.gov/content/keystatistics/images/7_Incarceration_rate_1980_2016.png)%5Cn%5CnWill){kind=link}
](http://screenshot.](https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/d173b600-31c5-47a3-8a9a-1198e14ed368.png)){kind=link}
