What is the probability of the US Steel/Nippon Steel merger being officially announced before January 21, 2025?
Welcome to the Multi-AI Oracle. Today, 5%, down from 8% yesterday.
Obtaining outside newsfeed. Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“The newsfeed reports on President-elect Donald Trump’s opposition to the proposed acquisition of US Steel by Nippon Steel, a transaction valued between $14 billion and $15 billion. Trump’s statements suggest a strong protectionist stance, citing national security concerns and the need to maintain American ownership of the steel industry. The acquisition, which has been approved by US Steel’s shareholders, is under review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and faces significant uncertainty due to Trump’s intent to block the deal prior to his inauguration. The situation reflects broader themes of trade protectionism and industrial policy that may affect the merger’s finalization.”
Fact-checking news summary: Here is a list of specific facts from the summary along with their relevance and accuracy assessed:
1. **Fact**: President-elect Donald Trump opposes the proposed acquisition of US Steel by Nippon Steel.
– **True/False (Accuracy)**: True. Donald Trump has expressed protectionist views and has opposed foreign acquisitions of critical industries.
– **True/False (Relevance)**: True. Trump’s opposition directly impacts the likelihood of the merger being announced before January 21, 2025.
2. **Fact**: The transaction is valued between $14 billion and $15 billion.
– **True/False (Accuracy)**: This detail is fictional in the context of real-world events and no such proposed acquisition is documented. Therefore, it is False.
– **True/False (Relevance)**: True. The value of the transaction is relevant to the financial and strategic importance of the merger.
3. **Fact**: Trump cites national security concerns and maintaining American ownership of the steel industry as reasons for his opposition.
– **True/False (Accuracy)**: True. Protectionism and national security are often cited in opposition to foreign acquisitions.
– **True/False (Relevance)**: True. These reasons are relevant as they influence CFIUS reviews and policy decisions affecting the merger.
4. **Fact**: The acquisition has been approved by US Steel’s shareholders.
– **True/False (Accuracy)**: Fictional in real-world terms for US Steel and Nippon Steel, False.
– **True/False (Relevance)**: True. Shareholder approval is a key step in a merger process, making it relevant to the potential announcement.
5. **Fact**: The acquisition is under review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).
– **True/False (Accuracy)**: True. Any significant foreign investment in critical infrastructure or industries often undergoes CFIUS review.
– **True/False (Relevance)**: True. CFIUS review is directly relevant to whether the merger will proceed and be announced.
6. **Fact**: The merger faces significant uncertainty due to Trump’s intent to block the deal prior to his inauguration.
– **True/False (Accuracy)**: In this fictional scenario, it is consistent, but regarding Trump’s actual term beginning in January 2017, it is False as no such situation occurred.
– **True/False (Relevance)**: True. Uncertainty and intent to block a deal are relevant to the probability of the merger being announced.
7. **Fact**: The situation reflects broader themes of trade protectionism and industrial policy.
– **True/False (Accuracy)**: True, as protectionism was a key theme during Trump’s political discourse.
– **True/False (Relevance)**: True.
These broader themes are relevant as they influence policy and potential mergers in sensitive sectors.
Fact-checked summary: The likelihood of the US Steel/Nippon Steel merger being officially announced before January 21, 2025, is influenced by several factors. President-elect Donald Trump opposes the merger, citing concerns over national security and the importance of maintaining American ownership in the steel industry. This opposition is likely to impact the potential announcement as it may affect policy decisions and CFIUS reviews, which are critical elements in the approval of foreign investments in strategic industries. Additionally, the situation is reflective of broader themes of trade protectionism and industrial policy, which are relevant as they shape policy decisions in sensitive sectors like the steel industry.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.1. The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
The base rate for the likelihood of a US Steel/Nippon Steel merger being announced by January 21, 2025, is low at 10%. This estimation considers the complexity and rarity of successful high-profile cross-border mergers where there is significant political opposition, especially in strategic sectors like steel. Historical cases where national security concerns were significant often resulted in delays or blocks by bodies like CFIUS. Given the President-elect’s opposition, this situation aligns with past cases where such mergers faced substantial hurdles.
Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate: A few factors could lead to a different outcome:
(1) A sudden shift in US political or economic policy favoring international mergers for strategic reasons, which could reduce opposition.
2) Significant changes in the global economic landscape or US-Japan trade relations that might incentivize resolving the merger quickly.
(3) Legal or political maneuvers that bypass typical regulatory concerns, though these are unlikely given the political climate. It’s crucial to monitor any policy announcements or changes in the US administration’s stance towards foreign investments in strategic industries.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– The US Steel and Nippon Steel must reach a mutual agreement on the terms of the merger. (Unlikely)
– There must be approval or at least not a blocking move from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which considers national security implications. (Unlikely)
– The US government, including the President-elect’s administration, must not introduce significant opposition or new policies specifically blocking such mergers. (Highly Unlikely)
– The broader economic and policy environment, particularly regarding US international trade and industrial policy, must not severely dissuade such a merger. (Unlikely)
Querying Perplexity… (Error: Perplexity is not returning an array)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.05 – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.05 – confidence: 6)
Querying Cohere… (Error: Cohere is not returning an array)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.05 – confidence: 4)
Median from LLMs: 0.05
Base rate: 0.1 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0
Confidence: 5
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.01
Reverse Mellers: 0.13
Theory of Mind: 0.2 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 1
Close Type: A (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 3
Model value (not submitted): 0.05
We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI (with news sourced from AskNews). A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The AIs generally reason that the prospect of a merger between US Steel and Nippon Steel before January 21, 2025, is very low. Key factors include President-elect Donald Trump’s strong opposition to such mergers, which significantly affects the regulatory approval process, especially involving the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) due to national security concerns. The tight timeline for negotiation and approval, along with the protectionist political climate and historical challenges faced by cross-border mergers in strategic sectors, further diminish the likelihood. The critical prediction could be wrong if there are advanced undisclosed negotiations, a shift in U.S. policies favoring international mergers, or significant global economic changes prompting a quick resolution. Nonetheless, given the political and regulatory environment, achieving the merger remains improbable.
Runtime: 137 seconds.
Given the agreement of the Dock Workers to salary increases, both union and the port will return to the bargaining table on Jan. 15, 2025 to discuss automation and other issues, what’s the probability of a strike in Q1 2025.
Welcome to the Multi-AI Oracle. Today, 33%, up from 18% yesterday.
Obtaining outside newsfeed. Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“Recent reports indicate that the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) have reached a tentative agreement that concludes a recent dockworkers’ strike. The agreement includes a significant 62% salary increase over six years and extends the collective bargaining contract until January 15, 2025. This development provides an opportunity to address outstanding issues such as automation and job protections, which remain critical factors in evaluating the probability of a strike occurring in the first quarter of 2025. The outcome of ongoing discussions between the parties will be pivotal in determining future actions. It is important to note that these reports should be approached cautiously as they may contain unverified information.”
Fact-checking news summary: Let’s break down the facts presented in the summary and analyze each one for its correctness and relevance to the outcome, which is the probability of a strike in Q1 2025.
1. **Fact**: The International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) have reached a tentative agreement.
– **Correctness**: True (Presuming the summary information is correct, a tentative agreement has been reached.)
– **Relevance**: True (Reaching a tentative agreement is directly relevant as it addresses and potentially resolves one of the main issues that could lead to a strike.)
2. **Fact**: The agreement concludes a recent dockworkers’ strike.
– **Correctness**: True (If the tentative agreement was indeed reached as a resolution to a recent strike, then the fact is correct.)
– **Relevance**: True (The conclusion of a strike is directly related to the probability of another strike, as a resolution decreases immediate tensions.)
3. **Fact**: The agreement includes a significant 62% salary increase over six years.
– **Correctness**: True (This statement is internally consistent, assuming this increase is accurate according to the summary.)
– **Relevance**: True (A significant salary increase affects labor satisfaction and union demands, impacting strike probability.)
4. **Fact**: The agreement extends the collective bargaining contract until January 15, 2025.
– **Correctness**: True (The summary states the contract is extended until this date, assuming no factual errors externally.)
– **Relevance**: True (The extension of the contract affects ongoing labor relations and negotiations, influencing strike likelihood.)
5. **Fact**: There is an opportunity to address outstanding issues such as automation and job protections.
– **Correctness**: True (Assuming the continuation of negotiations provides the chance to discuss these issues, this is correct.)
– **Relevance**: True (Outstanding issues like automation and job protections are crucial in union demands and strike considerations.)
6. **Fact**: These issues are critical factors in evaluating the probability of a strike in Q1 2025.
– **Correctness**: True (Automation and job protections often influence labor actions and negotiations.)
– **Relevance**: True (As stated, these factors directly influence the likelihood of a strike.)
7. **Fact**: The outcome of ongoing discussions will be pivotal in determining future actions.
– **Correctness**: True (This reflects a logical deduction that discussions will influence future actions.)
– **Relevance**: True (The nature of discussions outcomes directly impacts the probability of a strike.)
8. **Fact**: Reports about these matters should be approached cautiously as they may contain unverified information.
– **Correctness**: True (It’s prudent to treat initial reports with caution until verified.)
– **Relevance**: False (This is more a disclaimer on report credibility, not directly impacting strike probability).
Overall, the correctly identified relevant facts all reinforce understanding the factors and context affecting the probability of a potential strike in Q1 2025.
Fact-checked summary: The International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) have reached a tentative agreement, concluding a recent dockworkers’ strike. This agreement includes a significant 62% salary increase over six years and extends the collective bargaining contract until January 15, 2025. Additionally, there will be an opportunity to address outstanding issues such as automation and job protections, which are critical factors in evaluating the probability of a strike in Q1 2025. The outcome of ongoing discussions on these topics will be pivotal in determining future actions. These factors combined help in assessing the likelihood of a potential strike early in 2025.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.25. The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
The base rate of 0.25 reflects the moderately increased risk associated with the mid-contract point. The 62% salary increase and the extension of the contract to 2025 suggest strong financial concessions that may satisfy many union demands. However, automation and job protection remain pivotal topics that could disrupt labor relationships if not addressed properly. Historically, similar bargaining processes have seen tensions, though not always leading to strikes, hence a moderate likelihood existed before new tensions or unresolved issues emerge.
Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate: Despite the underlying concerns about automation and job protections, the significant salary increases and the contract extension could likely mitigate strike risks in the near term. The tentative agreement gives a framework to negotiate contentious issues, which may lead to resolutions without work stoppage. Moreover, given the recent agreement, both parties likely prefer stability and to avoid disrupting gains. Any unexpected economic downturns or external pressures, however, could introduce volatility that changes these dynamics.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– Failure of ongoing discussions between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) to satisfactorily address outstanding issues such as automation and job protections. (Moderate likelihood)
– Deterioration of economic conditions or unexpected negative events that exacerbate tensions or stressors for workers. (Low likelihood)
– Significant internal pressure from union members on leadership to address unresolved grievances, potentially leading to increased strike readiness. (Moderate likelihood)
– Breakdown in trust or relationship between the ILA and USMX despite the recent tentative agreement. (Low likelihood)
Querying Perplexity… (Error: Perplexity is not returning an array)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.35 – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.35 – confidence: 6)
Querying Cohere (AI predicts: 0.25 – confidence: 7)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.3 – confidence: 6)
Median from LLMs: 0.33
Base rate: 0.25 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0.04
Confidence: 6
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.26
Reverse Mellers: 0.38
Theory of Mind: 0.25 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.04
Close Type: B (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 4
Model value (not submitted): 0.33
We queried Claude, Mistral, Cohere, OpenAI (with news sourced from AskNews). A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The recent significant salary increase and contract extension between the ILA and USMX have alleviated some immediate pressures, reflecting a mutual desire for stability. However, unresolved issues regarding automation and job protection, set to be discussed in January 2025, could potentially lead to tensions, as these are critical and historical points of contention. Factors such as the economic environment and potential for internal union pressures also play a role in strike likelihood, which has been cautiously adjusted from a base rate of 0.25 to 0.35 due to these uncertainties. Despite the generally positive sentiment following the agreement, there remains a risk that automation advances could exacerbate job security fears, or that any downturns in global economic conditions might strain negotiations, increasing the strike potential in Q1 2025.
Runtime: 75 seconds.
Our bots vs humans experiments
Our concluded FED rate increase competition.
All our current bot projects
Past Multi-AI Oracle Forecasts
Dec. 2, 2024
Nov. 29, 2024
Nov. 28, 2024
Nov. 26, 2024
Nov. 25, 2024
Nov. 22, 2024
Nov. 21, 2024
Nov. 20, 2024
Nov. 19, 2024
Nov. 18, 2024
Nov. 15, 2024
Nov. 14, 2024
Nov. 13, 2024
Nov. 12, 2024
Nov. 11, 2024
Nov. 8, 2024
Nov. 7, 2024
Nov. 6, 2024
Nov. 5, 2024
Nov. 4, 2024
Nov. 1, 2024
Oct. 31, 2024
Oct. 30, 2024
Oct. 29, 2024
Oct. 28, 2024
Oct. 25, 2024
Oct. 24, 2024
Oct. 23, 2024
Oct. 22, 2024
Oct. 21, 2024
Oct. 17, 2024
Oct. 16, 2024
Oct. 16, 2024
Oct. 15, 2024
Oct. 14, 2024
Oct. 11, 2024
Oct. 10, 2024
Oct. 9, 2024
Oct. 8, 2024
Oct. 7, 2024
Oct. 3, 2024
Oct. 2, 2024
Oct. 1, 2024
Sept. 30, 2024
Sept. 27, 2024
Sept. 26, 2024
Sept. 25, 2024
Sept. 24, 2024
Sept. 23, 2024
Sept. 18, 2024
Sept. 17, 2024
Sept. 16, 2024
Sept. 13, 2024
Sept. 12, 2024
Sept. 11, 2024
Sept. 10, 2024
Sept. 9, 2024
Sept. 6, 2024
Sept. 5, 2024
Sept. 4, 2024
Sept. 3, 2024
Sept. 2, 2024
Aug. 30, 2024
Aug. 29, 2024
Aug. 28, 2024
Aug. 27, 2024
Aug. 26, 2024
Aug. 23, 2024
Aug. 22, 2024
Aug. 21, 2024
Aug. 20, 2024
Aug. 19, 2024
Aug. 16, 2024
Aug. 15, 2024
Aug. 14, 2024
Aug. 13, 2024
Aug. 12, 2024
Aug. 9, 2024
Aug. 8, 2024
Aug. 7, 2024
Aug. 6, 2024
Aug. 5. 2024
Aug. 2, 2024
Aug. 1, 2024
July 31, 2024
July 30, 2024
July 29, 2024
July 26, 2024
July 25, 2024
Guide to our Multi-AI Oracle’s Reports
Median: We collect the output values from the LLMs in an array. We then take the median value. This is between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0.15 = 15%).
Base rate: Currently we take OpenAI’s value as the base rate. We are working on a better value using a different prompt that takes into account process. The base rate helps to determine if the median makes sense.
SD: The standard deviation between the median and the base rate.
Confidence: We query each of the LLMs on how confident they are of their predictions (between 0 and 10) and take a median. Because the LLMs tend to be overconfident, we take anything lower than 6 as being low confidence. This factors into the overall model.
Conf Mode: Based on the confidence value. >=9 is high confidence. Below 6 is low confidence (this is also triggered by an exceptionally high SD).
Mellers: This refers to Barbara Mellers, specifically a paper she wrote that includes a formula for moving values towards an extreme (i.e. 0 or 1).
Reverse Mellers: This uses the formula from above, but with a sub-1 coefficient to move the values closer to 50%.
Theory of Mind: We ask the LLMs what they think other LLMs would predict. We hope that this makes them consider the questions more deeply.
Beta Distribution: Currently unused, but possibly of interest. This is based on the median, the base rate and the SD.
Close Type: We noticed that the appropriate base case for some questions is closer to the extremes, while others are closer to 50%. When we have a low confidence value, this helps us to determine whether to extremize or de-extremize the value. ‘A’ implies closer to zero. ‘B’ implies closer to 50%. ‘C’ implies closer to 100%.
# LLM Responses: The count of LLMs that responded. We query 5 currently, but they have a relatively high API failure rate.
Model value: For normal confidence mode, this is the median. For high confidence, this is the Mellers value. For low confidence, this is either the Mellers or Reverse Mellers (depending on the Close Type).
