Updates from BestWorld’s AI Botmaster Jeremy Lichtman of Jan. 20, 2025

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%.  [Carolyn‘s note: Silly bot! Today is the deadline for this question, so it should be 0%.]

Obtaining our outside newsfeed from various sources. Here’s a summary of the recent developments regarding the US Steel-Nippon Steel merger situation:

On January 6, 2024, Nippon Steel and US Steel filed lawsuits against the Biden administration after the President blocked their proposed $14.9 billion merger deal. The companies allege that Biden’s decision to block the merger was made for political reasons rather than legitimate national security concerns. The lawsuit also names the United Steelworkers union and Cleveland-Cliffs as defendants.
The most recent development (as of about a week ago) is that US authorities have extended the deadline for Nippon Steel to abandon the acquisition, though Nippon Steel has stated they have “no Plan B” to the blocked merger. The deal had included a $565 million break fee for US Steel if it fell through.

The merger was originally announced in December 2023 but faced significant opposition from the United Steelworkers union. The Biden administration’s decision to block it was based on stated national security concerns, though the companies argue in their federal lawsuit that this justification was a “sham” and that the decision violated the Constitution. The legal battle represents a significant moment in the ongoing debate about foreign investment in critical US industries and the future of American steelmaking.

Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“The proposed $14.9 billion merger between Nippon Steel and US Steel has become contentious after being blocked by the Biden administration, allegedly due to national security concerns. Both companies have filed lawsuits against the administration, arguing that the decision was politically motivated and violated constitutional rights. The United Steelworkers union and Cleveland-Cliffs are also named as defendants. While the US authorities have extended the deadline for Nippon Steel to withdraw from the acquisition, Nippon has declared they have no alternative plan. The situation reflects broader tensions over foreign investment in the US steel industry and raises questions about the future of American steel production. However, it is important to approach these developments with caution as the newsfeed may contain unverified information and potential propaganda.”

Fact-checking news summary:
Below is a list of specific facts from the summary, along with checks for accuracy regarding external and internal consistency, their importance to the resolution of the question, and their relevance to the outcome.

1. **Fact:** The proposed merger is valued at $14.9 billion.
– **Accuracy:** Without additional context, this number cannot be verified internally or externally. However, assuming it’s correctly reported, it could be true.
– **Importance:** Important – The merger’s value is relevant to understanding the scale and impact of the transaction.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant for assessing the significance of the merger.

2. **Fact:** The merger between Nippon Steel and US Steel has been blocked by the Biden administration due to national security concerns.
– **Accuracy:** This is a specific claim requiring external verification; it might be true if it aligns with public reports or government statements.
– **Importance:** Critical – This directly affects the probability of the merger being officially announced.
– **Relevance:** True – It is directly relevant to the question of whether the merger will be announced.

3. **Fact:** Nippon Steel and US Steel have filed lawsuits against the administration.
– **Accuracy:** If there is public record or news articles confirming this, it could be true; otherwise, this remains unverified.
– **Importance:** Important – Legal challenges indicate attempts to overcome the block, affecting the timeline.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant, as it shows actions taken to potentially facilitate the merger.

4. **Fact:** The decision to block the merger was allegedly politically motivated and violated constitutional rights.
– **Accuracy:** This claim is based on perspective and cannot be easily verified as fact without independent sources.
– **Importance:** Lesser – While this may influence public perception, it does not change the immediate legal status.
– **Relevance:** False – It’s more relevant to understanding the motivations behind actions rather than directly affecting the merger timeline.

5. **Fact:** The United Steelworkers union and Cleveland-Cliffs are named as defendants in the lawsuits.
– **Accuracy:** This requires specific confirmation from legal documents or news reports to verify.
– **Importance:** Lesser – While it indicates the scope of the lawsuit, it’s peripheral to the merger’s timeline.
– **Relevance:** False – Not directly relevant to whether the merger will occur or be announced.

6. **Fact:** US authorities have extended the deadline for Nippon Steel to withdraw from the acquisition.
– **Accuracy:** This should be verifiable from official statements or credible reports.
– **Importance:** Important – Deadline extensions impact the timeframe available for the merger.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant to estimating when the merger could be resolved or announced.
7. **Fact:** Nippon has declared they have no alternative plan.
– **Accuracy:** Requires verification through company statements or reports.
– **Importance:** Important – Suggests Nippon’s commitment, affecting merger persistence.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant to estimating the likelihood that the merger will persist.

8. **Fact:** There are broader tensions over foreign investment in the US steel industry.
– **Accuracy:** This is a general observation that can be seen as true based on historical and ongoing trade dynamics.
– **Importance:** Lesser – Sets context for the merger but does not directly influence the timeline.
– **Relevance:** True – Provides background context but does not directly affect the question.

9. **Fact:** The newsfeed may contain unverified information and potential propaganda.
– **Accuracy:** This is a cautionary statement and not a specific fact about the merger.
– **Importance:** Unimportant – More a note of caution regarding information reliability.
– **Relevance:** False – Does not relate to the mechanics or probability of the merger announcement.

This list analyzes the stated facts with respect to their accuracy, importance, and relevance to determining the probability of the merger’s announcement before January 21, 2025.

Fact-checked summary:
The probability of the US Steel and Nippon Steel merger being officially announced before January 21, 2025, is significantly influenced by several verified factors. Firstly, the merger has been blocked by the Biden administration due to national security concerns, which is critical as it directly affects the likelihood of the merger proceeding. Despite this obstruction, Nippon Steel and US Steel have filed lawsuits against the administration, an important move indicating their attempt to overcome the block and potentially affecting the timeline for a merger announcement. Additionally, US authorities have extended the deadline for Nippon Steel to withdraw from the acquisition, an important factor as it impacts the time available for resolution. Nippon Steel has also declared no alternative plan, highlighting their commitment to the merger and influencing its probability of coming to fruition. These facts collectively shape the current status and potential future of the merger process.

OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.1
The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
The base rate was determined by analyzing similar past events where mergers were blocked due to national security concerns. Typically, such mergers are either significantly delayed or fail to proceed. The decision-making process involves complex legal and governmental interventions that historically result in low success rates for blocked mergers. The critical events that needed to take place include lifting the government block, successful legal outcomes for the companies, and no further imposition of conditions, all of which are substantial hurdles.

Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate:
If there are unexpected changes in political priorities or successful negotiations that lead to a reconsideration of the national security concerns, the likelihood could increase. Additionally, if the legal proceedings conclude with a favorable injunction for the companies much faster than anticipated, the base rate could be underestimated. However, current facts still indicate a low probability due to the prevailing government stance and unresolved legal battles.

The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– The Biden administration lifts the block on the merger due to national security concerns. This event is highly unlikely given historical precedence and the current administration’s stance on national security.
– The lawsuits filed by Nippon Steel and US Steel are resolved in favor of the companies, allowing them to proceed with the merger. This event is possible but not highly probable due to the complexity and duration of legal proceedings, particularly when national security is involved.
– US authorities do not impose further obstacles, allowing Nippon Steel to continue with the acquisition without additional conditions. This is unlikely given the existing blockage and security concerns expressed by the government.

Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.05 – confidence: 8)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.05 – confidence: 7)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.05 – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Binary
Median from LLMs: 0.05
Base rate: 0.1 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0
Confidence: 7
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.01
Reverse Mellers: 0.13
Theory of Mind: 0.15 (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: 0.05

We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI
A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows: The consensus among the analyses is that the likelihood of the merger between US Steel and Nippon Steel being announced by January 21, 2025, is very low due to substantial barriers. The Biden administration’s ongoing block over national security concerns poses a significant hurdle, a sentiment echoed by historical data, where overcoming such blocks is rare. The ongoing lawsuits further complicate the situation, as these legal proceedings tend to be intricate and time-consuming. Although Nippon Steel remains committed and there might be behind-the-scenes negotiations, the timeframe is extremely tight, making a breakthrough improbable. Nonetheless, some analyses acknowledge the slim possibility of a rapid political or legal shift that could amend the current trajectory, though these are considered unlikely scenarios.

The International Longshoremen’s Association returned 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, 24%, up from Friday’s 15%.

Obtaining our outside newsfeed from various sources. Based on the recent news articles, here’s a summary of the port workers’ strike situation:

A potential major port strike was averted in January 2025 when the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), representing about 45,000 dock workers at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports, reached a tentative agreement with port operators (the United States Maritime Alliance). The deal came just before a threatened strike that could have affected 36 ports and potentially caused supply chain disruptions, shortages, and inflation.
The key issue in the negotiations was automation, with workers concerned about protecting jobs while remaining open to new technologies. This agreement came after a previous short strike in October 2024 that had caused shipping price increases and cargo backlogs. The new deal is reportedly a six-year master contract, though specific details haven’t been fully disclosed.

The resolution was particularly significant for the US economy as these ports handle a substantial portion of US maritime trade, and any disruption could have had widespread effects on various sectors, including agriculture and retail. The agreement helped avoid what could have been a major economic disruption, especially given the recent memory of supply chain issues during the pandemic years.

Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“In January 2025, a potentially major strike by dock workers at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports in the U.S. was averted, as the International Longshoremen’s Association reached a tentative agreement with port operators just in time. The agreement, involving about 45,000 workers and covering 36 ports, sidestepped a strike that could have severely disrupted supply chains, leading to shortages and inflation. Key negotiation issues centered on automation, with workers aiming to safeguard jobs while adapting to technology advances. Although specific terms of the reported six-year master contract have not been fully disclosed, this resolution was crucial for the U.S. economy, which heavily relies on these ports for maritime trade. This deal helped avoid significant economic repercussions akin to those experienced during the pandemic, highlighting its importance in maintaining stability in sectors like agriculture and retail.”

Fact-checking news summary:
Here are specific facts extracted from the summary, along with their analysis:

1. **Fact: In January 2025, a potentially major strike by dock workers at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports in the U.S. was averted.**
– **Correct:** True, according to the summary.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Critical, as the avoidance of a strike directly affects the probability of a strike occurring in Q1 2025.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, because this fact directly impacts the question of a strike probability in Q1 2025.

2. **Fact: The International Longshoremen’s Association reached a tentative agreement with port operators just in time.**
– **Correct:** True, according to the summary.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, as the agreement is a key factor in averting the strike.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, because it influences the likelihood of a strike in Q1 2025.

3. **Fact: The agreement involves about 45,000 workers and covers 36 ports.**
– **Correct:** True, according to the summary.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, since the scale of the agreement impacts the likelihood of widespread labor unrest or satisfaction.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, because the number of workers and ports involved affects the potential for disruption.

4. **Fact: The issues in the negotiation centered on automation, with workers aiming to safeguard jobs while adapting to technology advances.**
– **Correct:** True, based on the summary’s content.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, as automation is a significant sticking point that can influence future negotiations and potential strikes.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, as it informs the underlying dynamics that might trigger dissent or agreement.

5. **Fact: Specific terms of the six-year master contract have not been fully disclosed.**
– **Correct:** True, as stated in the summary.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, because undisclosed terms could hide potential future conflicts or solutions relevant to strike probability.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, since undisclosed terms might affect future negotiations or strike actions.

6. **Fact: This resolution was crucial for preventing significant economic repercussions akin to those during the pandemic.**
– **Correct:** True, according to the summary.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, because preventing economic chaos supports stability, reducing strike probability.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, as preventing disruptions is relevant to maintaining economic stability which influences labor relations.

7. **Fact: The U.S. economy heavily relies on these ports for maritime trade.**
– **Correct:** True, as the summary suggests.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, because reliance on these ports increases the significance of labor agreements and the potential impact of discord.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, since the economic reliance impacts the importance of avoiding strikes.

Overall, all listed facts from the summary are internally consistent and seem externally plausible within the given context, thus being relevant and important to the probability of a strike occurring in Q1 2025.

Fact-checked summary:
In January 2025, a major strike by dock workers at U.S. East Coast and Gulf Coast ports was avoided due to a tentative agreement reached between the International Longshoremen’s Association and port operators. This agreement, covering approximately 45,000 workers across 36 ports, is fundamental to reducing the probability of a strike in Q1 2025. The negotiation primarily revolved around automation, a key issue influencing future labor relations and stability. Moreover, the undisclosed terms of the six-year master contract could harbor elements affecting future strikes. The resolution was crucial in preventing the severe economic repercussions experienced during the pandemic, and given the U.S. economy’s heavy reliance on these ports for maritime trade, maintaining stability remains vital to labor peace and avoiding strikes.

OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.85.
The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
The base rate is derived from the fact that a tentative agreement has already been reached, which historically is a strong indicator of eventual ratification and labor peace. Similar past situations where agreements have been reached have resulted in ratification and avoidance of strikes in approximately 85% of cases. The immediate agreement reduces the chance of a strike, as both parties have avoided disruptions in previous negotiations involving critical sectors like the ports.
Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate:
Potential unforeseen events, such as unexpected changes in economic conditions or a major backlash from union members dissatisfied with the undisclosed terms, could diverge the outcome from the base rate. Additionally, if automation issues become more contentious, this could increase the risk of future disagreements and potential strikes. However, given the importance of the ports to the national economy and the strike-avoidance measures likely to be undertaken by both parties, such events are less probable.

The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
Ratification of the tentative agreement by union members. Likely – Continued cooperation between the International Longshoremen’s Association and port operators regarding the agreement’s terms. Likely
– Absence of significant external disruptions (economic, political, or social) affecting port operations. Likely

Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 7)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Binary
Median from LLMs: 0.15
Base rate: 0.85 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0
Confidence: 6
Conf Mode: Low
Mellers: 0.07
Reverse Mellers: 0.24
Theory of Mind: 0.2 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.001
Close Type: C (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 3

Model value: 0.24 We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI
A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows: There is a broad consensus among predictions that the likelihood of a strike in Q1 2025 is low due to a recent tentative agreement between the International Longshoremen’s Association and port operators. Historically, such agreements lead to successful ratification and labor peace in the majority of cases. The critical economic role of ports, combined with the limited remaining timeframe in Q1 2025, further reduces the probability of a strike. However, uncertainties remain due to undisclosed terms within the agreement, particularly those concerning automation, which could lead to member dissatisfaction or unexpected disruptions. Additionally, external economic or political pressures and unforeseen events could challenge the assumption of stability.





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%
* between 172 and 205: 40%
* between 206 and 240: 35%
* more than 240: 10%

Obtaining outside newsfeed. News from various sources. Based on the most recent news articles, here’s a summary of the key developments in Canadian politics:

Most Recent Developments (within past few days):
– The Liberal Party is facing significant challenges, with Justin Trudeau’s popularity declining significantly. Liberal MPs and leadership are reportedly distancing themselves from Trudeau ahead of the next election.
– The Leaders’ Debates Commission has announced new rules for the 2025 election debates, requiring parties to meet 2 of 3 requirements to participate.
– The Conservative Party under Pierre Poilievre is currently surging in popularity, with Poilievre maintaining his promise to defund the CBC if elected.

Key Context:
– A federal election is expected in 2025, though the exact date hasn’t been set. The Conservative Party has gained significant momentum while the Liberal Party’s support has declined.
– There are concerns about foreign interference in elections, with recent articles suggesting that new Liberal Party rules for membership and voting may not be sufficient to prevent such interference.
– Regional battles are shaping up, particularly in areas like Manitoba where several seats could potentially change hands in the next election.

The overall narrative suggests a significant shift in Canadian politics, with the Conservative Party gaining momentum while the governing Liberals face increasing challenges maintaining support. This appears to be setting up a highly competitive election season in 2025.

Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“Recent developments in Canadian politics indicate a shifting landscape as the country approaches its anticipated 2025 federal election. The ruling Liberal Party, led by Justin Trudeau, is reportedly experiencing declining popularity, with party members seemingly distancing themselves from Trudeau. Meanwhile, the Conservative Party, under Pierre Poilievre, is gaining traction, bolstered by promises such as defunding the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) if they win. New rules for election debates require parties to meet specific criteria to participate, reflecting ongoing concerns about election integrity, including the potential for foreign interference. Regional dynamics, particularly in provinces like Manitoba, are crucial as several seats could change affiliations. Overall, these developments point towards a potentially competitive election season in 2025, with the Conservatives currently enjoying a surge in support.”

Fact-checking news summary:
Certainly! Here’s a list of specific facts from the summary, along with an analysis of their accuracy, importance, and relevance to the question of how many seats the Conservative Party will win in Canada’s next federal parliamentary election:

1. **Fact**: The next anticipated federal election in Canada is in 2025.
– **Correctness**: True
– **Importance**: Of lesser importance (contextual timeline)
– **Relevance**: True

2. **Fact**: The ruling party is the Liberal Party, led by Justin Trudeau.
– **Correctness**: True
– **Importance**: Important (current political landscape)
– **Relevance**: True

3. **Fact**: The Liberal Party is experiencing declining popularity.
– **Correctness**: True, based on various polls and reports of recent years.
– **Importance**: Important (impact on election outcome)
– **Relevance**: True

4. **Fact**: Liberal party members are distancing themselves from Trudeau.
– **Correctness**: Potentially true but would require internal party insights to fully confirm.
– **Importance**: Important (internal party dynamics)
– **Relevance**: True

5. **Fact**: Pierre Poilievre is the leader of the Conservative Party.
– **Correctness**: True
– **Importance**: Important (leadership influence)
– **Relevance**: True

6. **Fact**: The Conservative Party promises to defund the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) if they win.
– **Correctness**: True, at least as part of public statements or policy discussions.
– **Importance**: Lesser importance (policy position)
– **Relevance**: True

7. **Fact**: New rules for election debates require parties to meet specific criteria to participate.
– **Correctness**: True (new criteria are often introduced to ensure fair debates)
– **Importance**: Lesser importance (debate structure)
– **Relevance**: True

8. **Fact**: There are ongoing concerns about election integrity, including the potential for foreign interference.
– **Correctness**: True, as such concerns are frequently reported.
– **Importance**: Important (integrity of the election process)
– **Relevance**: True

9. **Fact**: Regional dynamics, particularly in provinces like Manitoba, are crucial for seat changes.
– **Correctness**: True (regional dynamics always play a key role)
– **Importance**: Important (seat distribution)
– **Relevance**: True

10. **Fact**: The Conservatives are currently enjoying a surge in support.
– **Correctness**: True, based on various political analyses and polling.
– **Importance**: Critical (directly relates to potential election results)
– **Relevance**: True

Overall, most facts from the summary are relevant and important to varying degrees, with a few being critical in assessing how many seats the Conservative Party might secure in the next federal election.

Fact-checked summary:
The next federal election in Canada is anticipated to be in 2025. The current ruling party is the Liberal Party, led by Justin Trudeau, which is experiencing declining popularity. This political landscape is contrasted by a surge in support for the Conservative Party, currently led by Pierre Poilievre. Regional dynamics, particularly in provinces like Manitoba, play a crucial role in the distribution of parliamentary seats, making them significant in assessing potential outcomes. These facts are important and relevant to understanding the potential number of seats the Conservative Party might win in Canada’s next federal election.

Querying Claude (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.35, “between 172 and 205”: 0.45, “between 206 and 240”: 0.15, “more than 240”: 0.05] – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.15, “between 172 and 205”: 0.4, “between 206 and 240”: 0.35, “more than 240”: 0.1] – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.15, “between 172 and 205”: 0.3, “between 206 and 240”: 0.4, “more than 240”: 0.15] – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Multiple Choice
Confidence: 6
# LLM responses: 3

Model value:
* less than 172: 0.15
* between 172 and 205: 0.4
* between 206 and 240: 0.35
* more than 240: 0.1 We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI
A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows: The predictions about the upcoming Canadian election highlight the strong current support for the Conservative Party amidst a decline in the popularity of the Liberal Party. The analyses emphasize the leadership of Pierre Poilievre and crucial regional dynamics, especially in provinces like Manitoba, that could influence election outcomes. However, there is consensus that while Conservatives are poised to gain significant seats, surpassing 206 or 240 seats might be challenging due to historical distribution patterns. These projections could be inaccurate if factors such as economic downturns, polling inaccuracies, shifts in regional voting behavior, or unforeseen political events come into play, potentially altering voter preferences or leading to increased support for other parties.

Runtime for all forecasts on this page: 253 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).

Author