EA Forum Bot Site
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
helmetedhornbill3
0
0

Seems that sorting by top posts somewhat tracks with the highest % forecasted (right now the top 3 top posts are the highest %).

Reply
See in context
by Nathan Young, Jonathan Nankivell
2 min read 5

18

Cause prioritizationForecastingCause Exploration PrizesPrediction markets
Frontpage

Summary

  • Prediction markets can be used to predict the outcomes of prizes
  • This allows us to rank items by the chance they'll win
  • In this case it's less valuable because the outcome is only a month away, but this system could be used to rank entries to bigger prizes, funding applications or forum content
  • An example market
  • The current ranking of Open Philanthrop Cause Prioritisation Contest articles according to actual prediction markets

Introduction 

Good rankings are valuable. They let us do the most valuable things first. If we had a well-trusted and accurate system of ranking interventions, then much of EA's current work would be trivial (and so we'd have to move to more neglected work).

One way to rank things is to get someone you trust (eg 80,000 hours), to rank a set of objects (eg causes). Now you have an ordering that you trust. But what do you do if they haven't done their ordering yet?

Well, you can predict it.

You can get people, incentivised by profit, to predict the final ranking. Markets encourage the sharing of information - people want to make money. If someone has information that an object will be highly ranked, they buy shares in that market, and will eventually make profit. In exchange, they share their information with everyone else. I think we should probably have more summaries of economics (and feminism) in EA, and if we did, we'd know this is uncontroversial among economists.

In this test case, Open Philanthropy are running a Cause Prioritisation Contest. They are looking for new causes and will award prizes to those that win. 

Manifold Markets have created markets for each of those entries as to whether they will win the competition. Anyone can participate and win fake money (which can be turned into real donations to givewell) as well as a cash prize. This provides great incentives for people to predict correctly

The results are in a month, why should I care?

This ranking will suggest to you which articles are worth reading and understanding. But yes, it's not that valuable here. But it serves as a prototype for when you might care a lot more about the final results. Many things need to be ranked and will be in the future. This is a good test run.

Example

  • Here is an example market. Once you log in for free you can bet on it

Top ranked entries and their markets, in order of implied % chance of placing 1st or 2nd (13:10 UTC+1 22/9/6)[1]

(Link to all markets homepage)



https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ue9qrxXPLfGxNssvX/cause-exploration-governance-design-and-formation 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ue9qrxXPLfGxNssvX/cause-exploration-governance-design-and-formation 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/majcwf7i8pW8eMJ3v/new-cause-area-violence-against-women-and-girls 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/zgBmSgyWECJcbhmpc/family-planning-a-significant-opportunity-for-impact 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/j4eTj9dGqzEC5LEzK/cause-exploration-prizes-indoor-air-quality-to-reduce 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/BkJepw5R2pFc55LEc/cause-exploration-prizes-economic-growth-and-state-capacity 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/m2tgGev5XpkTkvERL/cause-area-developmental-cognitive-neuroepidemiology-1 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/fvN3DF5LBkCRiEDh5/cause-exploration-prizes-improved-quality-control-in-science 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/sCQBJhcNZ4Ye36Cni/cause-exploration-prizes-more-animal-advocacy-r-and-d 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/gE3MRaCmtGWBMTfB3/cause-exploration-prizes-expand-access-to-adhd-treatment-and 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/cPDptuFTiCLr8XXkL/cause-exploration-prizes-crime-reduction 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/BskvBk5zRfbHGNFKz/open-philanthropy-should-fund-the-abundance-agenda-movement 

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/9gjc4ok4GfwuyRASL/cosmic-rays-could-cause-major-electronic-disruption-and-pose 

 

  1. ^

    If they are in the wrong order, it's because I have to adjust them manually or because I did this quickly. If you'd like to help me in this, DM me and I'll make you a co-author. Here I argue for a post type which anyone can edit (community posts) and here that the forum could pulled in this ranking from the manifold API to rank things like this (new ranking systems)

  2. ^

    As elsewhere the fake money can be given to GiveWell as real money, which seems enough for me to call it "actual bets"

  3. ^

    Or places 2nd

18

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments5


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Nathan Young10
0
0

I would appreciate anyone who downvoted this explaining why. I think this is a straightforwardly information giving post.

Reply
helmetedhornbill3
0
0

Seems that sorting by top posts somewhat tracks with the highest % forecasted (right now the top 3 top posts are the highest %).

Reply
Nathan Young2
0
0

Entirely possible, though in my defence I think they added that sort because I asked them to. I will as later, let me know if you want to become a coauthor and add.

Reply
Nathan Young2
0
0

Things I will pay/be grateful for someone to do:

  • Be a coathor and help me keep the top 10 markets ordering up to date ($30 + share of author karma)
  • Fix formatting $10, give everything titles in "H2"
  • Write 3 line summaries of the articles and the intervention suggestion/main arguments 5$ per article
Reply
More from Nathan Young
368
FTX Crisis. What we know and some forecasts on what will happen next
4 authors
· · 3m read
321
321
241
Time Article Discussion - "Effective Altruist Leaders Were Repeatedly Warned About Sam Bankman-Fried Years Before FTX Collapsed"
Nathan Young
· · 5m read
175
175
119
Works in Progress: The Long Journey to Doing Good Better by Dustin Moskovitz [Linkpost]
Nathan Young
· · 1m read
3
3
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 23m read
 · 
Or on the types of prioritization, their strengths, pitfalls, and how EA should balance them   The cause prioritization landscape in EA is changing. Prominent groups have shut down, others have been founded, and everyone is trying to figure out how to prepare for AI. This is the first in a series of posts examining the state of cause prioritization and proposing strategies for moving forward.   Executive Summary * Performing prioritization work has been one of the main tasks, and arguably achievements, of EA. * We highlight three types of prioritization: Cause Prioritization, Within-Cause (Intervention) Prioritization, and Cross-Cause (Intervention) Prioritization. * We ask how much of EA prioritization work falls in each of these categories: * Our estimates suggest that, for the organizations we investigated, the current split is 89% within-cause work, 2% cross-cause, and 9% cause prioritization. * We then explore strengths and potential pitfalls of each level: * Cause prioritization offers a big-picture view for identifying pressing problems but can fail to capture the practical nuances that often determine real-world success. * Within-cause prioritization focuses on a narrower set of interventions with deeper more specialised analysis but risks missing higher-impact alternatives elsewhere. * Cross-cause prioritization broadens the scope to find synergies and the potential for greater impact, yet demands complex assumptions and compromises on measurement. * See the Summary Table below to view the considerations. * We encourage reflection and future work on what the best ways of prioritizing are and how EA should allocate resources between the three types. * With this in mind, we outline eight cruxes that sketch what factors could favor some types over others. * We also suggest some potential next steps aimed at refining our approach to prioritization by exploring variance, value of information, tractability, and the
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
[Cross-posted from my Substack here] If you spend time with people trying to change the world, you’ll come to an interesting conundrum: Various advocacy groups reference previous successful social movements as to why their chosen strategy is the most important one. Yet, these groups often follow wildly different strategies from each other to achieve social change. So, which one of them is right? The answer is all of them and none of them. This is because many people use research and historical movements to justify their pre-existing beliefs about how social change happens. Simply, you can find a case study to fit most plausible theories of how social change happens. For example, the groups might say: * Repeated nonviolent disruption is the key to social change, citing the Freedom Riders from the civil rights Movement or Act Up! from the gay rights movement. * Technological progress is what drives improvements in the human condition if you consider the development of the contraceptive pill funded by Katharine McCormick. * Organising and base-building is how change happens, as inspired by Ella Baker, the NAACP or Cesar Chavez from the United Workers Movement. * Insider advocacy is the real secret of social movements – look no further than how influential the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights was in passing the Civil Rights Acts of 1960 & 1964. * Democratic participation is the backbone of social change – just look at how Ireland lifted a ban on abortion via a Citizen’s Assembly. * And so on… To paint this picture, we can see this in action below: Source: Just Stop Oil which focuses on…civil resistance and disruption Source: The Civic Power Fund which focuses on… local organising What do we take away from all this? In my mind, a few key things: 1. Many different approaches have worked in changing the world so we should be humble and not assume we are doing The Most Important Thing 2. The case studies we focus on are likely confirmation bias, where
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
I wanted to share a small but important challenge I've encountered as a student engaging with Effective Altruism from a lower-income country (Nigeria), and invite thoughts or suggestions from the community. Recently, I tried to make a one-time donation to one of the EA-aligned charities listed on the Giving What We Can platform. However, I discovered that I could not donate an amount less than $5. While this might seem like a minor limit for many, for someone like me — a student without a steady income or job, $5 is a significant amount. To provide some context: According to Numbeo, the average monthly income of a Nigerian worker is around $130–$150, and students often rely on even less — sometimes just $20–$50 per month for all expenses. For many students here, having $5 "lying around" isn't common at all; it could represent a week's worth of meals or transportation. I personally want to make small, one-time donations whenever I can, rather than commit to a recurring pledge like the 10% Giving What We Can pledge, which isn't feasible for me right now. I also want to encourage members of my local EA group, who are in similar financial situations, to practice giving through small but meaningful donations. In light of this, I would like to: * Recommend that Giving What We Can (and similar platforms) consider allowing smaller minimum donation amounts to make giving more accessible to students and people in lower-income countries. * Suggest that more organizations be added to the platform, to give donors a wider range of causes they can support with their small contributions. Uncertainties: * Are there alternative platforms or methods that allow very small one-time donations to EA-aligned charities? * Is there a reason behind the $5 minimum that I'm unaware of, and could it be adjusted to be more inclusive? I strongly believe that cultivating a habit of giving, even with small amounts, helps build a long-term culture of altruism — and it would
Recent opportunities in Cause prioritization
123
AI Moral Alignment: The Most Important Goal of Our Generation
Ronen Bar
· · 10m read
31
31
15
Open call: "Existential risk of AI: technical conditions"
miller-max
· · 1m read
1
1
21
Developing AI Safety: Bridging the Power-Ethics Gap (Introducing New Concepts)
Ronen Bar
· · 6m read
3
3
View more