Hide table of contents

A forecasting digest with a focus on experimental forecasting.

  • You can sign up here.
  • You can also see this post on LessWrong here
  • And the post is archived here

The newsletter itself is experimental, but there will be at least five more iterations. Feel free to use this post as a forecasting open thread.

Why is this relevant to EAs?

  • Some items are immediately relevant (e.g., forecasts of famine).
  • Others are projects whose success I'm cheering for, and which I think have the potential to do great amounts of good (e.g., Replication Markets).
  • The remaining are relevant to the extent that cross-polination of ideas is valuable.
  • Forecasting may become/is becoming a powerful tool for world-optimization, and EAs may want to avail themselves of this tool.

Conflict of interest: With Foretold in general and Jacob Laguerros in particular. This is marked as (c.o.i) throughout the text.

Index

  • Prediction Markets & Forecasting platforms.
    • Augur.
    • PredictIt & Election Betting Odds.
    • Replication Markets.
    • Coronavirus Information Markets.
    • Foretold. (c.o.i).
    • Metaculus.
    • Good Judgement and friends.
  • In the News.
  • Long Content.

Prediction Markets & Forecasting platforms.

Forecasters may now choose to forecast any of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse: Death, Famine, Pestilence and War.

Augur: augur.net

Augur is a decentralized prediction market. It will be undergoing its first major update.

Predict It & Election Betting Odds: predictIt.org & electionBettingOdds.com

PredictIt is a prediction platform restricted to US citizens or those who bother using a VPN. Anecdotically, it often has free energy, that is, places where one can earn money by having better probabilities, and where this is not too hard. However, due to fees & the hassle of setting it up, these inefficiencies don't get corrected. In PredictIt, the world politics section...

The question on which Asian/Pacific leaders will leave office next? also looks like it has a lot of free energy, as it overestimates low probability events.

Election Betting Odds aggregates PredictIt with other such services for the US presidential elections.

Replication Markets: replicationmarkets.com

Replication Markets is a project where volunteer forecasters try to predict whether a given study's results will be replicated with high power. Rewards are monetary, but only given out to the top N forecasters, and markets suffer from sometimes being dull. They have added two market-maker bots and commenced and conclude their 6th round. They also added a sleek new widget to visualize the price of shares better.

Coronavirus Information Markets: coronainformationmarkets.com

For those who want to put their money where their mouth is, there is now a prediction market for coronavirus related information. The number of questions is small, and the current trading volume started at $8000, but may increase. Another similar platform is waves.exchange/prediction, which seems to be just a wallet to which a prediction market has been grafted on.

Unfortunately, I couldn't make a transaction in these markets with ~30 mins; the time needed to be included in an ethereum block is longer and I may have been too stingy with my gas fee.

Foretold: foretold.io (c.o.i)

Foretold is an forecasting platform which has experimentation and exploration of forecasting methods in mind. They bring us:

Metaculus: metaculus.com

Metaculus is a forecasting platform with an active community and lots of interesting questions. They bring us a series of tournaments and question series:

/(Good Judgement?[^]*)|(Superforecast(ing|er))/gi

Good Judgement Inc. is the organization which grew out of Tetlock's research on forecasting, and out of the Good Judgement Project, which won the IARPA ACE forecasting competition, and resulted in the research covered in the Superforecasting book.

The Open Philantropy Project has funded this covid dashboard by their (Good Judgement Inc.'s) Superforecasting Analytics Service, with predictions solely from superforecasters; see more on this blogpost.

Good Judgement Inc. also organizes the Good Judgement Open (gjopen.com)[https://www.gjopen.com/], a forecasting platform open to all, with a focus on serious geopolitical questions. They structure their questions in challenges, to which they have recently added one on the Coronavirus Outbreak; some of these questions are similar in spirit to the short-fuse Metaculus Tournament.

Of the questions which have been added recently to the Good Judgment Open, the crowd doesn't buy that Tesla will release an autopilot feature to navigate traffic lights, despite announcements to the contrary. Further, the aggregate...

  • is extremely confident that, before 1 January 2021, the Russian constitution will be amended to allow Vladimir Putin to remain president after his current term.
  • gives a lagging estimate of 50% on Benjamin Netanyahu ceasing to be the prime minister of Israel before 1 January 2021.
  • and 10% for Nicolás Maduro leaving before the 1st of June.
  • forecasts famine (70%).
  • Of particular interest is that GJOpen didn't see the upsurge in tests (and thus positives) in the US until until the day before they happened, for this question. Forecasters, including superforecasters, went with a linear extrapolation from the previous n (usually 7) days. However, even though the number of cases looks locally linear, it's also globally exponential, as this 3Blue1Brown video shows. On the other hand, an enterprising forecaster tried to fit a Gompertz distribution, but then fared pretty badly.

In the News

Long Content

Comments8


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Nice to see a newsletter on this topic!

Clarification: The GJO coronavirus questions are not funded by Open Phil. The thing funded by Open Phil is this dashboard (linked from our blog post) put together by Good Judgment Inc. (GJI), which runs both GJO (where anyone can sign up and make forecasts) and their Superforecaster Analytics service (where only superforecasters can make forecasts). The dashboard Open Phil funded uses the Superforecaster Analytics service, not GJO. Also, I don't think Tetlock is involved in GJO (or GJI in general) much at all these days, but GJI is indeed the commercial spinoff from the Good Judgment Project (GJP) that Tetlock & Mellers led and which won the IARPA ACE forecasting competition and resulted in the research covered in Tetlock's book Superforecasting.

Thanks for the correction; edited.

Note that the headline ("Good Judgement Project: gjopen.com") is still confusing, since it seems to be saying GJP = GJO. The thing that ties the items under that headline is that they are all projects of GJI. Also, "Of the questions which have been added recently" is misleading since it seems to be about the previous paragraph (the superforecasters-only questions), but in fact all the links go to GJO.

Edited again. If you want, throw me a bone: what's the last explicit probabilistic prediction you've made? Also, I liked your review on How to Measure Anything, which feels relevant to the topic at hand. NNTR.

The headline looks broken in my browser. It looks like this:

/(Good Judgement?[^]*)|(Superforecast(ing|er))/gi

The last explicit probabilistic prediction I made was probably a series of forecasts on my most recent internal Open Phil grant writeup, since it's part of our internal writeup template to prompt the grant investigator for explicit probabilistic forecasts about the grant. But it could've easily been elsewhere; I do somewhat-often make probabilistic forecasts just in conversation, or in GDoc/Slack comments, though for those I usually spend less time pinning down a totally precise formulation of the forecasting statement, since it's more about quickly indicating to others roughly what my views are rather than about establishing my calibration across a large number of precisely stated forecasts.

I've written this interactive notebook in Foretold prediction platform. It is meant to be completely beginner friendly and takes about 2 hours to go through. I've used it as the basis for a workshop, and the accompanying slides can be found at the bottom of the notebook.

From the notebook:

In this interactive notebook, our goal is to actively try out forecasting and learn several basic tools. After this, you will be able to more easily use forecasts in your daily life and decision making, understand broadly how forecasters go about predicting stuff, and you should know if this is something you want to dive into deeper and how to go about that. We have 5 sections:

  1. We will start immediately with several examples.
  2. Then go on to understand how probabilities feel like, and how to be more calibrated.
  3. Work on the technique of outside view and inside view reasoning.
  4. Briefly discuss several interesting techniques - research, combining models and changing scope.
  5. Try out some actual forecasts from start to finish!
and 10% for Nicolás Maduro.

The time horizon for this is "before 1 June 2020." That seems reasonable.

Oh hey, I've seen you around on GJOPen. Thanks for the correction; edited.

Curated and popular this week
abrahamrowe
 ·  · 9m read
 · 
This is a Draft Amnesty Week draft. It may not be polished, up to my usual standards, fully thought through, or fully fact-checked.  Commenting and feedback guidelines:  I'm posting this to get it out there. I'd love to see comments that take the ideas forward, but criticism of my argument won't be as useful at this time, in part because I won't do any further work on it. This is a post I drafted in November 2023, then updated for an hour in March 2025. I don’t think I’ll ever finish it so I am just leaving it in this draft form for draft amnesty week (I know I'm late). I don’t think it is particularly well calibrated, but mainly just makes a bunch of points that I haven’t seen assembled elsewhere. Please take it as extremely low-confidence and there being a low-likelihood of this post describing these dynamics perfectly. I’ve worked at both EA charities and non-EA charities, and the EA funding landscape is unlike any other I’ve ever been in. This can be good — funders are often willing to take high-risk, high-reward bets on projects that might otherwise never get funded, and the amount of friction for getting funding is significantly lower. But, there is an orientation toward funders (and in particular staff at some major funders), that seems extremely unusual for charitable communities: a high degree of deference to their opinions. As a reference, most other charitable communities I’ve worked in have viewed funders in a much more mixed light. Engaging with them is necessary, yes, but usually funders (including large, thoughtful foundations like Open Philanthropy) are viewed as… an unaligned third party who is instrumentally useful to your organization, but whose opinions on your work should hold relatively little or no weight, given that they are a non-expert on the direct work, and often have bad ideas about how to do what you are doing. I think there are many good reasons to take funders’ perspectives seriously, and I mostly won’t cover these here. But, to
Jim Chapman
 ·  · 12m read
 · 
By Jim Chapman, Linkedin. TL;DR: In 2023, I was a 57-year-old urban planning consultant and non-profit professional with 30 years of leadership experience. After talking with my son about rationality, effective altruism, and AI risks, I decided to pursue a pivot to existential risk reduction work. The last time I had to apply for a job was in 1994. By the end of 2024, I had spent ~740 hours on courses, conferences, meetings with ~140 people, and 21 job applications. I hope that by sharing my experiences, you can gain practical insights, inspiration, and resources to navigate your career transition, especially for those who are later in their career and interested in making an impact in similar fields. I share my experience in 5 sections - sparks, take stock, start, do, meta-learnings, and next steps. [Note - as of 03/05/2025, I am still pursuing my career shift.] Sparks – 2022 During a Saturday bike ride, I admitted to my son, “No, I haven’t heard of effective altruism.” On another ride, I told him, “I'm glad you’re attending the EAGx Berkely conference." Some other time, I said, "Harry Potter and Methods of Rationality sounds interesting. I'll check it out." While playing table tennis, I asked, "What do you mean ChatGPT can't do math? No calculator? Next token prediction?" Around tax-filing time, I responded, "You really think retirement planning is out the window? That only 1 of 2 artificial intelligence futures occurs – humans flourish in a post-scarcity world or humans lose?" These conversations intrigued and concerned me. After many more conversations about rationality, EA, AI risks, and being ready for something new and more impactful, I decided to pivot my career to address my growing concerns about existential risk, particularly AI-related. I am very grateful for those conversations because without them, I am highly confident I would not have spent the last year+ doing that. Take Stock - 2023 I am very concerned about existential risk cause areas in ge
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
Written anonymously because I work in a field where there is a currently low but non-negligible and possibly high future risk of negative consequences for criticizing Trump and Trumpism. This post is an attempt to cobble together some ideas about the current situation in the United States and its impact on EA. I invite discussion on this, not only from Americans, but also those with advocacy experience in countries that are not fully liberal democracies (especially those countries where state capacity is substantial and autocratic repression occurs).  I've deleted a lot of text from this post in various drafts because I find myself getting way too in the weeds discoursing on comparative authoritarian studies, disinformation and misinformation (this is a great intro, though already somewhat outdated), and the dangers of the GOP.[1] I will note that I worry there is still a tendency to view the administration as chaotic and clumsy but retaining some degree of good faith, which strikes me as quite naive.  For the sake of brevity and focus, I will take these two things to be true, and try to hypothesize what they mean for EA. I'm not going to pretend these are ironclad truths, but I'm fairly confident in them.[2]  1. Under Donald Trump, the Republican Party (GOP) is no longer substantially committed to democracy and the rule of law. 1. The GOP will almost certainly continue to engage in measures that test the limits of constitutional rule as long as Trump is alive, and likely after he dies. 2. The Democratic Party will remain constrained by institutional and coalition factors that prevent it from behaving like the GOP. That is, absent overwhelming electoral victories in 2024 and 2026 (and beyond), the Democrats' comparatively greater commitment to rule of law and democracy will prevent systematic purging of the GOP elites responsible for democratic backsliding; while we have not crossed the Rubicon yet, it will get much worse before things get better. 2. T
Recent opportunities in Forecasting
32
Ozzie Gooen
· · 2m read