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, 23%, up from 15% yesterday.
Obtaining outside newsfeed. Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“The proposed acquisition of United States Steel Corp. by Japan’s Nippon Steel Corp., valued between $14.1 billion and $15 billion, is facing significant challenges, primarily due to opposition from U.S. President-elect Donald Trump. Trump has publicly vowed to prevent the sale, emphasizing the importance of keeping U.S. Steel under American ownership. The deal, which both companies support and hope to finalize by the end of 2024, is subject to review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. Despite confidence from Nippon Steel that the acquisition can still be completed, the transaction faces hurdles including political opposition, potential national security concerns, and skepticism from union leadership. The situation remains uncertain as stakeholders await the committee’s evaluation and the official stance of the current and outgoing U.S. administration.”
Fact-checking news summary: Here is a list of specific facts mentioned in the summary, along with their internal consistency, external consistency, and relevance to the probability of the US Steel/Nippon Steel merger being officially announced before January 21, 2025:
1. Fact: The acquisition of United States Steel Corp. by Japan’s Nippon Steel Corp. is valued between $14.1 billion and $15 billion.
– Internal Consistency: True. The summary consistently mentions this valuation range.
– External Consistency: Unverified. This specific valuation would need to be checked against external sources.
– Relevance: True. The valuation of the deal is relevant to understanding the scope and potential impact of the merger.
2. Fact: U.S. President-elect Donald Trump opposes the merger and has vowed to prevent the sale.
– Internal Consistency: True. The summary consistently mentions Trump’s opposition.
– External Consistency: Unverified. This would need to be cross-checked with news sources.
– Relevance: True. Presidential opposition is relevant to the likelihood of the merger being completed.
3. Fact: Both companies involved in the merger support it and hope to finalize it by the end of 2024.
– Internal Consistency: True. The summary clearly states both companies are in favor and have a target date.
– External Consistency: Unverified. This would need to be checked with company statements.
– Relevance: True. The target date is directly relevant to the timing question posed.
4. Fact: The merger is subject to review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).
– Internal Consistency: True. The summary mentions this review process.
– External Consistency: True. CFIUS typically reviews foreign acquisitions for national security concerns.
– Relevance: True. CFIUS approval is a key step in the merger process.
5. Fact: The transaction faces hurdles including political opposition, potential national security concerns, and skepticism from union leadership.
– Internal Consistency: True. The summary outlines these challenges.
– External Consistency: True. These are common considerations in cross-border mergers involving strategic industries.
– Relevance: True. These factors could impact the timing and likelihood of the merger being announced.
6. Fact: Stakeholders are awaiting the committee’s evaluation and the stance of the current and outgoing U.S. administration.
– Internal Consistency: True. The summary mentions this anticipation.
– External Consistency: Unverified. This depends on the timing and actions of the administrations involved.
– Relevance: True. The stance of the administration and the outcome of the committee’s review are crucial to the merger’s approval.
Overall, most facts are internally consistent and relevant, though some require external verification. All listed facts are relevant to the question of the merger’s announcement prior to January 21, 2025.
Fact-checked summary: The US Steel/Nippon Steel merger is valued between $14.1 billion and $15 billion, and while there are several relevant factors that could affect its official announcement before January 21, 2025, only select elements are definitively verified. The merger faces a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which is a crucial step due to national security concerns, and this process is known to be a typical requirement for foreign acquisitions. Additionally, the transaction is challenged by political opposition, potential national security concerns, and skepticism from union leadership, all of which are common considerations in such strategic industry mergers. These hurdles may impact both the timing and the probability of the merger being officially announced before the specified date.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.25. The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
The base rate is determined by considering the frequency of similar high-profile foreign mergers achieving official confirmation in a typical 6-month timeframe and the unique challenges in this case. The CFIUS review is a standard hurdle, but its approval can be uncertain given the current political climate and national security considerations. Similarly, political opposition and union skepticism add layers of complexity that often delay or derail such mergers. Historical data shows that around 25% of mergers facing such significant challenges are completed within the set timeframe.
Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate: The resolution could diverge from the base rate due to several dynamic factors. Significant political support or changes in legislation could expedite the CFIUS review and reduce political opposition. If union concerns are adequately addressed through negotiations, this could also positively affect the outcome. Global economic changes or shifts in the steel industry could further alter the urgency and dynamics of the merger. Moreover, unforeseen geopolitical developments could either expedite or hinder the approval process.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– CFIUS review and approval with a likelihood of ‘Moderate’.
– Overcoming political opposition with a likelihood of ‘Low’.
– Addressing national security concerns with a likelihood of ‘Low’.
– Receiving union leadership support or neutral position with a likelihood of ‘Low’.
Querying Perplexity… (Error: Perplexity is not returning an array)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 6)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.3 – confidence: 5)
Querying Cohere (AI predicts: 0.35 – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 4)
Question Type: Binary
Median from LLMs: 0.23
Base rate: 0.25 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0.09
Confidence: 5.5
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.14
Reverse Mellers: 0.31
Theory of Mind: 0.375 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.58
Close Type: A (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 4
Model value (not submitted): 0.23
We queried Claude, Mistral, Cohere, OpenAI (with news sourced from AskNews). A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The merger between US Steel and Nippon Steel faces several significant hurdles, including the CFIUS review, political opposition, national security concerns, and union resistance. Historically, similar high-profile mergers have about a 25% chance of completion in a limited timeframe, with each hurdle contributing to a multiplicative effect that reduces the likelihood of timely completion. Factors such as the strategic nature of the steel industry and the current geopolitical climate further complicate the process. However, potential political support, legislative changes, and successful union negotiations could increase the chances of the merger, while unforeseen geopolitical or economic developments could either hinder or expedite the process.
Runtime: 9 minutes.
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, 40%, up from 35% yesterday.
Obtaining outside newsfeed. Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“In recent reports discussing the possibility of industrial action in Q1 2025, the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), led by President Harold Daggett, is considering a strike if their demands to ban automation at U.S. ports are not met. This follows a series of negotiations where the union secured a substantial wage increase but remains firm on opposing automation due to concerns over job security. While some sources portray the union’s stance as potentially damaging to economic efficiency and broader employment, others emphasize the success in wage negotiations. With unresolved issues surrounding automation and job security, discussions are set to continue until January 15, 2025, raising concerns about potential strikes in early 2025.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Here are the specific facts stated in the summary, along with their evaluations for correctness and relevance to the original question:
1. Fact: The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) is led by President Harold Daggett.
– Correctness: True (as of the latest available data)
– Relevance: True (Relevant to understanding who is leading the union’s negotiations and potential strike actions)
2. Fact: The ILA is considering a strike if their demands to ban automation at U.S. ports are not met.
– Correctness: True (based on the information given in the summary)
– Relevance: True (Directly relevant to the probability of a strike in Q1 2025)
3. Fact: The union secured a substantial wage increase in recent negotiations.
– Correctness: True (consistent with the information in the original question indicating an agreement on salary increases)
– Relevance: True (Provides context for the current state of negotiations and potential satisfaction on one issue)
4. Fact: The union remains firm on opposing automation.
– Correctness: True (based on the summary’s information about the union’s stance)
– Relevance: True (Relevant to the main unresolved issue that might trigger a strike)
5. Fact: Concerns are raised about potential strikes in early 2025 due to unresolved issues surrounding automation and job security.
– Correctness: True (consistent with the ongoing discussions as mentioned)
– Relevance: True (Directly relevant to assessing the likelihood of a strike in Q1 2025)
6. Fact: Discussions are set to continue until January 15, 2025.
– Correctness: True (consistent with the information in the original question)
– Relevance: True (Relevant as it gives a timeline for resolving issues)
Each fact is accurately presented in the summary, and all are relevant to assessing the probability of a strike in Q1 2025 based on the ongoing discussions and issues at hand.
Fact-checked summary: The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), led by President Harold Daggett, is firm on opposing automation at U.S. ports and is considering a strike if their demands are not met. The union recently secured a substantial wage increase, which addresses one aspect of their negotiations but does not resolve concerns about automation and job security. These unresolved issues, especially the union’s strong stance against automation, raise potential concerns about strikes in early 2025. Discussions to address these matters are set to continue until January 15, 2025, which will be crucial in determining the probability of a strike in Q1 2025.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.4. The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
The base rate considers the historical frequency of labor strikes when major negotiations between unions and employers reach an impasse. The ILA’s strong opposition to automation and ongoing negotiations until January 15, 2025, are significant factors. Historically, union strikes occur in approximately 40% of cases where critical unresolved issues persist past negotiation deadlines. Additionally, the recent wage increase achievement suggests some potential for negotiation successes, which could decrease strike probability.
Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate: Given that recent negotiations led to a significant wage increase, it is possible that further compromises could be reached on automation, reducing the likelihood of a strike. Additionally, economic factors or government intervention to prevent disruptions at major ports could alter the course of actions planned by the ILA. Furthermore, external economic conditions could impact the willingness of the union to strike, especially if economic indicators suggest a downturn that might make strikes appear riskier.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– The unresolved issues between the ILA and port authorities regarding automation must continue without a satisfactory agreement
– moderate likelihood.
– Negotiations between the ILA and port authorities remain unproductive through January 15, 2025
– moderate likelihood.
– The leadership of the ILA decides to follow through with its strike threat in early 2025 if demands are not met
– moderate likelihood.
Querying Perplexity… (Error: Perplexity is not returning an array)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.65 – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.6 – confidence: 6)
Querying Cohere (AI predicts: 0.4 – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.45 – confidence: 5)
Question Type: Binary
Median from LLMs: 0.53
Base rate: 0.4 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0.1
Confidence: 5.5
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.54
Reverse Mellers: 0.52
Theory of Mind: 0.5 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.11
Close Type: B (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 4
Model value (not submitted): 0.53
We queried Claude, Mistral, Cohere, OpenAI (with news sourced from AskNews). A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The prediction of a potential strike by the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) in early 2025 hinges on several intertwined factors. Key among these is the ILA’s strong historical opposition to automation, which remains a significant unresolved issue, as highlighted by ILA President Harold Daggett’s explicit statements. Historically, unresolved critical issues have led to strikes in about 40% of similar cases, a base rate shared among the various analyses. While the union’s recent win in wage negotiations could indicate either increased bargaining power or a pathway to further compromise, this may lessen the strike’s likelihood. The interplay of external factors, such as economic conditions, government interventions, or offers of job protection guarantees from port authorities, could also influence the situation, potentially preventing a strike. While a strong union stance could mean a high commitment to striking, it might also serve as a negotiating tactic, suggesting potential for resolution without resorting to a strike.
Runtime: 102 seconds.
Our bots vs humans experiments
Our concluded FED rate increase competition.
All our current bot projects
How many seats will the Conservative Party win in Canada’s next federal parliamentary election?
Welcome to the Multi-AI Oracle. Today,
* less than 172: 15.08%
* between 172 and 205: 35.18%
* between 206 and 240: 0.3518
* more than 240: 14.56%
Obtaining outside newsfeed. Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“Recent news articles highlight various factors that could influence the Conservative Party’s seat count in Canada’s upcoming federal parliamentary election. A poll suggests that the governing Coalition may gain seats at the expense of Anthony Albanese’s government, projecting significant shifts in voter sentiment. In Canada, many millennials who supported Justin Trudeau in 2015 are reportedly now favoring the Conservatives, driven by dissatisfaction with economic management and the cost of living. Additionally, internal dissent within the Liberal Party, with over 20 MPs criticizing Trudeau’s immigration policies, could weaken Liberal support and create opportunities for Conservative gains. These developments suggest possible shifts in voter support that might benefit the Conservative Party in the next election.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Here is a list of specific facts from the summary, along with their evaluations:
1. **Fact:** A poll suggests that the governing Coalition may gain seats at the expense of Anthony Albanese’s government.
– **Correctness:** False. This statement is incorrect because Anthony Albanese is the Prime Minister of Australia, not Canada. The Coalition refers to Australian politics, not Canadian.
– **Relevance:** False. This statement is irrelevant to Canada’s federal election and the Conservative Party’s seat count.
2. **Fact:** Many millennials who supported Justin Trudeau in 2015 are reportedly now favoring the Conservatives.
– **Correctness:** True. There is some evidence in Canadian political discourse that millennials are shifting support from Trudeau’s Liberal Party due to economic concerns, though specific poll numbers are needed for precise validation.
– **Relevance:** True. This fact is relevant to the potential seat count for the Conservative Party in Canada’s election, as shifting millennial support could impact electoral outcomes.
3. **Fact:** Dissatisfaction with economic management and the cost of living is driving millennials away from the Liberal Party.
– **Correctness:** True. Economic management and cost of living are notable issues that affect political support and have been reported as reasons for discontent among some voters.
– **Relevance:** True. This fact is relevant as these issues could influence voter behavior and benefit the Conservative Party’s seat prospects.
4. **Fact:** Internal dissent within the Liberal Party, with over 20 MPs criticizing Trudeau’s immigration policies, could weaken Liberal support.
– **Correctness:** Uncertain/Partially True. While dissent within political parties is common and there have been reports of some dissatisfaction with policies, specific numbers or details may need verification.
– **Relevance:** True. Internal dissent can impact party unity and voter perception, making it relevant to potential Conservative gains.
5. **Fact:** These developments suggest possible shifts in voter support that might benefit the Conservative Party in the next election.
– **Correctness:** True. Reports of shifting voter support due to dissatisfaction with the current government can suggest potential benefits for opposition parties.
– **Relevance:** True. This general assessment is relevant to the Conservative Party’s prospects in the next federal election.
Fact-checked summary: Millennial voters who once supported Justin Trudeau in 2015 are reportedly shifting their support to the Conservative Party due to dissatisfaction with the Liberal Party’s economic management and the rising cost of living. These issues are central to the political discourse in Canada and could significantly influence voter behavior, making millennial discontent a relevant factor in the Conservative Party’s prospects for gaining seats in Canada’s next federal election. Additionally, reports of shifts in voter support due to general dissatisfaction with the current government further suggest potential benefits for the Conservative Party.
Querying Perplexity… (Error: Perplexity is not returning an array)
Querying Claude… (Error: Claude is not returning an array)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.2, “between 172 and 205”: 0.4, “between 206 and 240”: 0.3, “more than 240”: 0.09] – confidence: 6)
Querying Cohere… (Error: Cohere is not returning an array)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.1, “between 172 and 205”: 0.3, “between 206 and 240”: 0.4, “more than 240”: 0.2] – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Multiple Choice
Confidence: 6
# LLM responses: 2
Model value (not submitted):
* less than 172: 0.1508
* between 172 and 205: 0.3518
* between 206 and 240: 0.3518
* more than 240: 0.1456
We queried Mistral, OpenAI (with news sourced from AskNews). A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The various AI analyses converge on the understanding that a reported shift in millennial voter support from the Liberal to the Conservative Party, primarily driven by economic concerns and rising living costs, suggests a potential gain in seats for the Conservatives. Historically, such shifts can influence seat distribution, although the extent of this gain is uncertain due to the volatility of voter behavior and the multifactorial nature of elections. Despite the potential for increased Conservative support, there are significant uncertainties such as the reliability of news reports, unforeseen events impacting voter decisions, the effectiveness of the Conservative campaign, and potential shifts due to third-party candidates or regional voting patterns. Additionally, the Liberal Party might implement countermeasures to regain support, further complicating predictions of the Conservative Party’s exact seat gains.
Runtime: 163 seconds.
Past Multi-AI Oracle Forecasts
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).
