Loading
Preparing this view
Retrieving the current information and preserving your place. No action is required.
Loading current information
Forecast AlphaForecast AlphaLoading
Retrieving the current information and preserving your place. No action is required.
Loading
Retrieving the current information and preserving your place. No action is required.
Market 4.0% against model 22.0%. Resolves in 18d 22h, data updated 3d ago.
Decision layer
The model disagreement survives the current gates. This is still research context, not financial advice.
Expected value after costs, not raw probability spread.
How much support the model sees across available inputs.
Thin markets can erase apparent edge through spread and slippage.
Resolution ambiguity, timing, and data quality pressure the decision.
Why / why not trade
This public box mirrors the internal diagnostic style without exposing execution controls: decision, probability gap, cost-adjusted edge, blocker, and next thing to monitor.
side YES
22.0% model / 4.0% market
fees, spread, slippage, risk
Model edge survives the current public research gates.
Watch whether the market price moves toward or away from the model.
Model 22.0% vs market 4.0%.
Raw disagreement is reduced by fees, spread, slippage, and risk controls.
Model leans YES
The model-market gap currently survives the decision gates, but it is still research context and must be judged against the public track record.
Sign in to return to this exact question, review governed evidence, and record an append-only probability without exposing private thesis text.
usable feature coverage.
Volume $353,600
The model estimates a 18-point higher probability than the market, primarily driven by historical base rate.
| FACTOR | SIGNAL | WEIGHT | LOG-ODDS ΔLog-odds contribution measures how much each factor shifted the model's probability estimate in log-odds space — the mathematically correct way to stack independent evidence. Formula: Δlog-odds = weight × signal. Positive values push the probability up; negative values push it down. Log-odds are converted back to probability via the logistic function at the end. | DIRECTION | DESCRIPTION |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Historical base rate | 26% | — | −1.063 | Bearish | Historical frequency for this kind of event — the prior before any market-specific evidence. |
| Cross-market divergence | This factor was not available for this market. No approved cross-venue link exists for this market. |
No comparable events matched for this market.
This market will resolve to "Yes" if there is a military encounter between the military forces of a NATO country and Russia between market creation and August 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No". A "military encounter" is defined as any incident involving the use of force such as missile strikes, artillery fire, exchange of gunfire, or other forms of direct military engagement between NATO and Russian military forces. Non-violent actions, such as airspace violations, firing of warning shots (such as the June, 2021 Black Sea Confrontations between Russian forces and HMS Defender), or cyberattacks will not qualify. Interception of missiles or other one-way attack or loitering munitions (e.g. Shahed drones) which are targeting a 3rd party other than the listed countries or their respective forces will not alone qualify. Shooting down UAVs which are not munitions (e.g. MQ-9, Orlan 10, Orion, Bayraktar TB2, etc.) will qualify. Intentional physical collisions, including aerial interceptions and naval ramming without the direct use of weaponry, such as the 2023 Black Sea incident—where a Russian Su-27 damaged a U.S. MQ-9 Reaper drone's propeller, leading to its crash— will not qualify regardless of damage. Military contractors will qualify only if confirmed to be operating under the direct command or coordination of the respective state’s armed forces (e.g. the Battle of Khasham would not qualify). The resolution source for this market will be a consensus of credible reporting.
analyzed by heuristicThis market will resolve to "Yes" if there is a military encounter between the military forces of a NATO country and Russia between market creation and August 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No". A "military encounter" is defined as any incident involving the use of force such as missile strikes, artillery fire, exchange of gunfire, or other forms of direct military engagement between NATO and Russian military forces. Non-violent actions, such as airspace violations, firing of warning shots (such as the June, 2021 Black Sea Confrontations between Russian forces and HMS Defender), or cyberattacks will not qualify. Interception of missiles or other one-way attack or loitering munitions (e.g. Shahed drones) which are targeting a 3rd party other than the listed countries or their respective forces will not alone qualify. Shooting down UAVs which are not munitions (e.g. MQ-9, Orlan 10, Orion, Bayraktar TB2, etc.) will qualify. Intentional physical collisions, including aerial interceptions and naval ramming without the direct use of weaponry, such as the 2023 Black Sea incident—where a Russian Su-27 damaged a U.S. MQ-9 Reaper drone's propeller, leading to its crash— will not qualify regardless of damage. Military contractors will qualify only if confirmed to be operating under the direct command or coordination of the respective state’s armed forces (e.g. the Battle of Khasham would not qualify). The resolution source for this market will be a consensus of credible reporting.
Resolves Mon, 31 Aug 2026 00:00:00 GMT. The contract pays on these exact criteria, not on the thesis.
Paper position only. No real-money execution
| 0.20 |
| — |
| — |
| Whether the same event is priced differently on another venue. A gap may signal an opportunity or a structural difference. |
| 7-day price momentum | −0.01 | 0.35 | −0.005 | Neutral | 7-day drift of the market's own implied probability — sustained moves carry information. |
| BTC/ETH 7-day momentum | —This factor was not available for this market. This factor applies to crypto markets only. | 0.20 | — | — | 7-day Bitcoin or Ethereum return, normalized. Applied to crypto-category markets only. |
| Rate surprise | —This factor was not available for this market. This factor applies to Fed, CPI, and macro markets only. | 0.25 | — | — | 2-year Treasury yield reaction in the 48 hours after the most recent scheduled release — a proxy for how markets interpreted the data versus expectations. |
| Yield curve shift | —This factor was not available for this market. This factor applies to Fed, CPI, and macro markets only. | 0.15 | — | — | 30-day change in the 10-year minus 2-year Treasury spread. A flattening curve signals tightening expectations; steepening signals easing. |
| News signal | —This factor was not available for this market. No news signal available for this market in the past 14 days. | 0.25 | — | — | Reliability-weighted direction of relevant news from the past 14 days. Official sources (filings, agency statements) carry more weight than commentary. |
| Crowd forecast | —This factor was not available for this market. Insufficient forecasters to compute crowd signal. Requires at least 5 calibration-weighted estimates. | 0.20 | — | — | Calibration-weighted average of user probability estimates. Only applied when 5 or more weighted forecasters have submitted estimates. |
| Model probability | 25.6% | Prior: 26% · Market: 4.0% | |||
| Confidence (λ)Confidence λ (lambda) controls how much weight to give the model vs. the market. Formula: p_final = λ·p_model + (1−λ)·p_market. λ is derived from data quality, factor agreement, and liquidity. When inputs are weak, the model shrinks toward the market — not toward 50%. | 0.83 | Final: 22.0% = λ·model + (1−λ)·market | |||
Since the first stored model read on 2026-07-31, the market has moved from 9.4% to 4.0%.
This is a directional diagnostic for unresolved markets, not final performance. Resolved outcomes still determine the official live record.
Missing: Cross-market divergence, News signal, Crowd forecast
When features are unavailable, the model increases uncertainty and weights the final estimate closer to the market price. Lower data quality does not mean the market is wrong. It means the model is being appropriately humble.
| Inverse liquidity | 17 | |
| Price volatility | 9 | |
| Resolution proximity | 0 | |
| Data quality | 16 | |
| Category base risk | 80 | |
| Resolution ambiguity | 8 | |
| Regulatory exposure | 0 | |
| Portfolio concentration | 0 |
Composite score 23/100, higher = riskier.
| Market | Mkt | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| Category context | ||
| Israel x Iran ceasefire continues through August 2? category context: same category + wording overlap | 99.9% | -23pt |
| Israel x Iran ceasefire continues through August 3? category context: same category + wording overlap | 99.9% | -27pt |
| Israel x Iran ceasefire continues through July 31? category context: same category + wording overlap | 99.5% | -- |
| Israel x Iran ceasefire continues through August 1? category context: same category + wording overlap | 99.5% | -- |
| Will China invades Taiwan before GTA VI? category context: same category + wording overlap | 50.5% | -0pt |
Divergences > 5pt flagged in amber. For cross-venue pricing, see the Scanner.