This question will resolve as YES if a nuclear weapon is used in combat anywhere in the world outside of Russia or Ukraine (or in international waters targeting Russian or Ukrainian assets) after October 4, 2022 and before January 1, 2024. Otherwise NO.
"Use in combat" excludes detonations that do not produce 10 or more direct casualties (fatalities or injuries from the blast including radiation poisoning) that are not part of the side/group/nation that detonated the nuke.
Oct 6, 11:53am: Resolution criteria updated to require casualties to trigger positive resolution, to be more in line with the commonsense reading of the question.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ126 | |
| 2 | Ṁ16 | |
| 3 | Ṁ14 | |
| 4 | Ṁ13 | |
| 5 | Ṁ12 |
I believe most of the probability mass here is in this clause:
"Demonstration detonations" designed to intimidate would also count.
Based on my reading of the resolution criteria, a demonstration detonation in international waters (and therefore outside Russia and Ukraine) that causes no damage would resolve as YES.
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/2nDTrDPZJBEerZGrk/samotsvety-nuclear-risk-update-october-2022 puts the chance of nukes beyond Ukraine in 1 year at 1.6%. And I believe they are forecasting "nuclear conflict" which probably would not include demonstration detonations alone.
What is the probability that Russia will use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine in the next YEAR?
Aggregate probability: 0.16388 (16%)
I think the chance of a nuclear detonation in international waters is probably higher than the chance of a nuclear detonation in Ukraine - I think it's more likely that Russia would start with a "test" or "demonstration" detonation.
After 10 minutes of consideration, I think my forecast based on the resolution criteria is roughly 15%, but I think there's a highly misleading mismatch between that and the title - I don't think people expect "demonstration detonation" to count as "in combat". I will try to make some markets with alternate resolution criteria that are hopefully clearer.
By the way, I don't think this is @SG 's fault, the stuff about "in combat" and "demonstration detonation" came from one of the previous nuclear risk markets.
@jack I just created this question yesterday and you are only person who is currently long this contract, so I think it would still be reasonable to change the wording to something more restricive. How about requiring "demonstration detonations" to produce casualties? (Feel free to dump your current position into my limit order before I officially change the wording.)