Resolves the same way as https://kalshi.com/markets/gpt4p5/gpt45-released
If GPT-4.5 has been released by Jun 30, 2024, then the market resolves to Yes.
Payout Criterion: The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that OpenAI has released a large language model named GPT-4.5, or which is a successor to GPT-4 in the way that GPT-3.5 was a successor to GPT-3, by . A large language model named GPT-5 would not fulfill the Payout Criterion and would resolve the market to No. Release to only paid users would be encompassed by the Payout Criterion. A beta or test version would also be encompassed by the Payout Criterion.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,242 | |
| 2 | Ṁ984 | |
| 3 | Ṁ420 | |
| 4 | Ṁ416 | |
| 5 | Ṁ360 |
People are also trading
I resolved this to "YES", just like the Kalshi market. When I said "the same way", I did mean "identically" (and in fact I have a hard time seeing how it could not be read that way). This is locking in a M150 loss for myself, so I hope it's clear that I'm not doing this out of selfish interest.
@JonasVollmer no worries, this was always the most likely outcome and of course I have no problem with it!
@jim Thanks!
To be clear, if I was going to resolve differently from Kalshi, I would have made that explicit (I would have written "according to my interpretation of the same criteria")
How come I can't see how much chrisb spent
To be clear, OP is welcome to resolve differently to Kelshi.
"Resolves the same way" can be read as just meaning that it will resolve according to same the criterion. The criterion given by Kelshi (and quoted in the market description) is:
OpenAI has released a large language model named GPT-4.5, or which is a successor to GPT-4 in the way that GPT-3.5 was a successor to GPT-3
And, since such a model was not actually released, OP is entitled to (and definitely ought to) resolve NO (assuming no such model is released by end of quarter).
I don't care what you guys think, it's a valid interpretation and according to the rules and regulations of Manifold this is ultimately OP's decision. Do what you think is right, Jonas, and do not submit to the bullies! In the event of legal trouble I will work for you pro bono.
I should probably close this now that we've reached the point of someone asking to talk to someone's manager.
@JonasVollmer can you weigh in when you get a chance?
The funny thing is that I think Chris actually agrees with you about GPT-4o on the facts, it's just that this market said it would resolve the same way as the Kalshi market and the Kalshi market resolved Yes.
Markets explicitly mirroring Kalshi/Metaculus/Polymarket resolutions are a standard part of Manifold and any of them not resolving the same way as the market on the other site would be a misresolution.
There are of course also markets that just copy the resolution criteria and then the creator interprets the criteria as they see fit, but this market directly linked to the Kalshi market and said it resolved the same way so I think this is clearly the former case and not the later case. If Jonas had just copy/pasted the criteria without referencing the Kalshi market, it'd be a different matter.
Resolves the same way as
Is an ambiguous phrase that can be read either as "resolves identically to Kelshi's resolution" or "resolves according to the same criterion". In case you cannot see the second reading, notice that "way" can refer to the method of resolution, rather than the resolution itself (and this is perhaps the more natural reading).
You point out that markets explicitly mirroring Kalshi are a standard part of Manifold. I agree.
You also point out that there are markets that just copy the resolution criteria. I agree.
But I don't think it's clear which one this market is, so it's up to OP to make the resolution according to his own interpretation as the market creator.
FWIW (jim-coded undilutable satire-truth) I'm not sure two moderators with large stakes in the market should be threatening the market creator with misresolution etc.
@jim Ehhh normally I think I'm overly cautious in saying things with my mod hat on while I've got a position but this is super clear cut and I only have 0.3% of my net worth in it.
I am trying to cut down on my trading on potentially controversial markets as the pivot arrives, though. But this one should have stopped being potentially controversial as soon as the Kalshi market resolved. They just have a pretty bad UI that still displays the price the market was at before resolution so some people didn't realize it was already determined.
@Joshua ahhhhhh! But the net-worth statistic is misleading, isn't it? Firstly, because 0.3% is not really such a very small amount, and, secondly, because traders care about the beauty of their graphs, not just the growth of their net worth amounts!
@Joshua I just meant u might still care the gradient 😆
P.S. in case of moderator infetterance I won't be DMing @SG but um rather some other person
@jim I agree with your sentiments here, it does seem like it should be up to the creator. The title is so different than the description and GPT-4o doesn't quite seem like gpt-4.5
Meanwhile the official Manifold account… smh
Why didn’t I bet on this market instead of that one 😭
@Hazel Uh just to be clear
That option in the prop bets was about the name specifically. I also had another option in the prop bet market for "GPT-4o" as the name, which resolved yes.