Forecast trace · verifiable lifecycle of one forecast
The question is stored in Russian (the original language); no translation is available yet — the original is shown.
forecast id 2619f50e90d44574a7a9bcf2bc6df795 · question id 2619f50e90d44574a7a9bcf2bc6df795:q
Did not occur
Recorded 4 Nov, 03:19 UTC by resolver importance_judge v1 · knowledge through 4 Nov, 03:19 UTC · resolver importance_judge v1
The outcome says what happened. It does not say whether the forecast was good: forecast quality is a separate question, answered below only by the persisted score.
No persisted score for this forecast yet: the scoring ledger currently covers other forecast families, and nothing is recomputed here.
Quality is read from the persisted proper score only, never from the outcome label: the same «did not occur» outcome yields different scores for different frozen probabilities.
An individual proper score of the frozen probability against the recorded outcome. Skill is defined only as a cohort aggregate against a baseline (Brier Skill Score), never per row — this number is not a skill claim.
Entries are ordered by the time each record appeared. Later checks, resolutions and revisions carry their own timestamps and never alter the earlier snapshot they follow.
Question opened
2619f50e90d44574a7a9bcf2bc6df795:qProbability frozen: 10%
2619f50e90d44574a7a9bcf2bc6df795:s0Resolution r0: Did not occurcurrent verdict
Resolver note (not independent evidence):
Our own system's self-assessment — explicitly marked as such, not an external source.
What would refute this: our own LLM importance assessment does not reach 4/5 before the deadline
2619f50e90d44574a7a9bcf2bc6df795:r0