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, 14%, down from 35% yesterday.
Obtaining outside newsfeed. Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“The proposed merger between US Steel and Nippon Steel remains uncertain, with the target completion date of December 2024 contingent on regulatory approval from the US government. This review period has been extended, potentially delaying the acquisition. Politically, there is significant opposition from prominent figures, including President Joe Biden and President-elect Donald Trump, citing potential national security issues and job losses. Additionally, the United Steelworkers (USW) union is concerned about possible job cuts and social unrest, which has prompted Nippon Steel to engage in negotiations with union leaders. Overall, while Nippon Steel is hopeful about the deal’s completion, various political, regulatory, and social challenges create an uncertain outlook, making it unclear if an official decision will be reached by January 2025.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Here is a list of specific facts derived from the summary, along with
checks for correctness and relevance to the outcome:
1. Fact: The target completion date for the US Steel/Nippon Steel merger is December 2024.
– Correctness: True (internally consistent within the summary).
– Relevance: True (knowing the target date is relevant to assessing the probability of announcement before January 21, 2025).
2. Fact: Regulatory approval from the US government is required for the merger.
– Correctness: True (regulatory approvals are typical in large mergers).
– Relevance: True (regulatory approval impacts the likelihood and timing of the announcement).
3. Fact: The review period for regulatory approval has been extended.
– Correctness: True (consistent internally, although external verification would be necessary to confirm current status).
– Relevance: True (delays in regulatory review affect the timeline for announcement).
4. Fact: President Joe Biden opposes the merger.
– Correctness: True, assuming the internal consistency of the summary, though external verification would be needed.
– Relevance: True (opposition from the sitting President is relevant to the likelihood of regulatory approval).
5. Fact: President-elect Donald Trump opposes the merger.
– Correctness: False (as of October 2023, Donald Trump is not the President-elect).[Editor’s note: out of date!]
– Relevance: True (hypothetical opposition from a President-elect would be relevant, but this statement is incorrect).
6. Fact: There are concerns about national security issues related to the merger.
– Correctness: True (internally consistent, though external verification would be needed).
– Relevance: True (national security concerns affect regulatory approval).
7. Fact: There are concerns about job losses related to the merger.
– Correctness: True (internally consistent, though external verification would be needed).
– Relevance: True (job loss concerns can influence political and regulatory outcomes).
8. Fact: The United Steelworkers (USW) union is concerned about possible job cuts and social unrest.
– Correctness: True (internally consistent, though external verification would be needed).
– Relevance: True (union opposition can impact political support and the merger’s progress).
9. Fact: Nippon Steel is engaging in negotiations with union leaders.
– Correctness: True (internally consistent, though external verification would be needed).
– Relevance: True (negotiations with unions are relevant to resolving labor opposition).
10. Fact: Nippon Steel is hopeful about the deal’s completion.
– Correctness: True (internally consistent).
– Relevance: True (Nippon Steel’s optimism might influence stakeholder perceptions, though it does not guarantee outcome).
11. Fact: Various political, regulatory, and social challenges create an uncertain outlook for the merger.
– Correctness: True (internally consistent and generally plausible).
– Relevance: True (these challenges are directly relevant to the likelihood and timing of the merger announcement).
Fact-checked summary:
The US Steel/Nippon Steel merger has a target completion date of December 2024. For the merger to proceed, regulatory approval from the US government is necessary, and the review period for this approval has been extended, which affects the timeline for any official announcement. President Joe Biden opposes the merger, adding an additional layer of political complexity and potentially impacting regulatory outcomes. There are concerns related to national security and job losses, both of which are relevant to the regulatory review process. The United Steelworkers (USW) union has voiced worries about job cuts and the potential for social unrest, while Nippon Steel is currently negotiating with union leaders to address these concerns. Although Nippon Steel remains hopeful about the merger’s completion, the presence of political, regulatory, and social challenges creates an uncertain
outlook regarding whether the merger will be officially announced by January 21, 2025.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.15
The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
In determining the base rate, several factors are considered. The presence of strong political opposition, particularly from President Joe Biden, suggests a low likelihood of regulatory approval, which is crucial for the merger to proceed. Historical data on mergers facing political and national security concerns usually results in lower approval rates. Additionally, there is an active and unresolved concern from significant stakeholders such as the United Steelworkers union, influencing the social and regulatory landscape. While Nippon Steel is actively working with union leaders, the complexity of negotiations and the extended regulatory review timelines signify uncertainty. Past merger and acquisition events with similar regulatory and political challenges have experienced delays or denials, which further reduces the expectation of a favorable resolution within the given timeframe.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– Regulatory approval from the US government is granted for the merger. (Improbable)
– Concerns related to national security and job losses are resolved or mitigated to the satisfaction of the regulatory bodies. (Unlikely)
– President Joe Biden’s opposition does not significantly influence the regulatory decision. (Low likelihood)
– Nippon Steel successfully negotiates with US Steelworkers union leaders to address and alleviate concerns regarding job cuts and potential social unrest. (Uncertain)
– The extended review period concludes favorably and in time for an official announcement by January 21, 2025. (Uncertain)
Querying Perplexity (AI predicts: 0.12 – confidence: 6)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.1 – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 4)
Median from LLMs: 0.14
Base rate: 0.15 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0.02
Confidence: 5.5
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.06
Reverse Mellers: 0.23
Theory of Mind: 0.2 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.75
Close Type: A (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 4
Model value (not submitted): 0.14
We queried Perplexity, Claude, Mistral, OpenAI (with news sourced from
AskNews). A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The prediction about the US Steel/Nippon Steel merger not being announced by January 21, 2025, hinges on several key obstacles including strong political opposition from President Joe Biden, unresolved concerns from the United Steelworkers union, and the extensive regulatory review period. National security and job loss concerns further complicate the likelihood of regulatory approval. Historical trends suggest a low success rate for mergers with similar challenges, especially given the tight timeline. However, the prediction could be altered if mitigating factors arise, such as successful negotiations with unions, rapid resolution of regulatory challenges, concessions from Nippon Steel, or a shift in political dynamics that lessens opposition, potentially expediting the process.
Runtime: 89 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, 45%, up from 40% yesterday.
Obtaining outside newsfeed. Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“Recent reports suggest that the ongoing negotiations between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX) have led to a temporary suspension of a planned dockworkers’ strike until January 15, 2025. The discussions center on contentious issues such as wage increases and the implementation of automation technologies, which the ILWU argues may threaten job security. Both parties acknowledge the economic ramifications of a potential strike, which could disrupt supply chains and lead to shortages and price increases. If negotiations fail to produce an agreeable resolution by the January deadline, there is a heightened risk of a strike occurring in the first quarter of 2025.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Based on the provided summary, here is a list of specific facts stated, alongside an assessment of their correctness and relevance to the outcome question:
1. **Fact: The ongoing negotiations are between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX).**
– Correctness: True (Correct if the ILWU and USMX are historically known to be negotiating parties for dockworkers in the U.S.)
– Relevance: True (Relevant, as the parties involved are critical to understanding the potential for a strike.)
2. **Fact: There is a temporary suspension of a planned dockworkers’ strike until January 15, 2025.**
– Correctness: True (Correct based on the information given in the summary stating the suspension of the strike.)
– Relevance: True (Relevant, as it directly indicates the timing related to the potential for a strike.)
3. **Fact: The discussions center on contentious issues such as wage increases and the implementation of automation technologies.**
– Correctness: True (Correct if these are known areas of negotiation historically associated with the ILWU negotiations.)
– Relevance: True (Relevant, as these issues are a basis for dispute and could influence the outcome of a strike.)
4. **Fact: The ILWU argues that automation may threaten job security.**
– Correctness: True (Correct if the ILWU has voiced concerns about automation affecting job security during negotiations.)
– Relevance: True (Relevant, as it highlights a pivotal issue that could precipitate a strike.)
5. **Fact: Both parties acknowledge the economic ramifications of a potential strike, including supply chain disruptions and price increases.**
– Correctness: True (Generally accepted as correct if acknowledging potential economic impacts is a logical stance for negotiation parties.)
– Relevance: True (Relevant, as understanding the economic impact is crucial for assessing the likelihood of a strike.)
6. **Fact: If negotiations fail to produce an agreeable resolution by the January deadline, there is a heightened risk of a strike occurring in Q1 2025.**
– Correctness: True (Correct if failing negotiations typically lead to increased risk of strikes.)
– Relevance: True (Relevant, as it directly ties to predicting the probability of a strike in Q1 2025.)
All facts presented in the summary are consistent and relevant to assessing the probability of a dockworkers’ strike in Q1 2025.
Fact-checked summary:
The ongoing negotiations are between the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX), which are historically recognized as the negotiating parties for dockworkers in the U.S. A temporary suspension of a planned dockworkers’ strike is in place until January 15, 2025. The discussions are focused on key issues such as wage increases and the implementation of automation technologies, with the ILWU expressing concerns that automation may threaten job security. Both parties are aware of the economic ramifications of a potential strike, including supply chain disruptions and price increases. If negotiations do not reach an agreeable resolution by the January deadline, there is a heightened risk of a strike occurring in Q1 2025.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.4
The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
To arrive at the base rate, I considered the historical context of ILWU and USMX negotiations, which have frequently been contentious but often resolved without a strike due to economic pressures. The key issues include wage negotiations and job security concerns related to automation. Given that both parties are acutely aware of the economic consequences of a strike, the stakes for reaching an agreement are high. However, the complexity of the automation issue reduces the likelihood of a straightforward resolution. It is currently late November 2024, with just under two months remaining to resolve differences before the January 15, 2025 deadline, making the risk of a strike in Q1 2025 significant if negotiations fail.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– Successful negotiation of wage increases satisfactory to ILWU Moderate
– Development of an acceptable agreement on the implementation of automation technologies Low
– Extension of the negotiation deadline past January 15, 2025, to avoid immediate strikes Moderate
Querying Perplexity (AI predicts: 0.55 – confidence: 6)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.65 – confidence: 6)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.35 – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.35 – confidence: 5)
Median from LLMs: 0.45
Base rate: 0.4 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0.13
Confidence: 6
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.43
Reverse Mellers: 0.47
Theory of Mind: 0.45 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.33
Close Type: B (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 4
Model value (not submitted): 0.45
We queried Perplexity, Claude, Mistral, OpenAI (with news sourced from AskNews). A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The prediction regarding the potential for a strike by the ILWU in Q1 2025 hinges on several factors. Historically, the negotiations between the ILWU and USMX have been contentious, yet typically resolved without a strike, owing to the significant economic pressure and consequences of a disrupted supply chain. While wage negotiations have been successfully concluded, the complexity of automation and job security issues remains a major sticking point, with the risk exacerbated by the tight timeframe left until the January 15, 2025 deadline. The likelihood of a strike is heightened by the ILWU’s past willingness to use strikes as leverage, especially with unresolved automation concerns, and the timing during the peak shipping season. However, several elements could alter this outlook: smoother negotiations than anticipated, governmental intervention, or extended talks might prevent a strike. Additionally, the accuracy of newsfeed information is uncertain, which could influence predictions if assumptions are overstated or based on unreliable sources.
Runtime: 72 seconds.
Our bots vs humans experiments
Our concluded FED rate increase competition.
All our current bot projects
Bots vs Staff Forecasts
BestWorld’s staff of Brian LaBatte and Carolyn Meinel are forecasting the US Steel/Nippon Steel Merger in competition with Jeremy’s Multri-AI Oracle. Their version has two sub-questions:
(1) Will the US Steel / Nippon Steel merger be approved by the White House before Jan. 21. 2025?” Brian’s latest forecast is 80%; Carolyn’s is 70%. Michael’s is 35%.
(2) If yes, when will US Steel investors relations announce the final outcome of the acquisition with Nippon Steel?
a. Before November 5, 2024
b. Between November 6 and December 31, 2024
c. January 1 to 20, 2024
d. After January 21, 2024
Brian’s latest forecasts are 0%, 20%, 20%, and 60%.
Carolyn’s are 0%, 20%, 20%, and 60%.
Our spreadsheets below:
Our past forecasts below:
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 from the bestworldbots: 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).
