This market resolves to YES if OpenAI publicly announces and releases a new flagship large language model (successor to GPT-4o or equivalent) by November 15, 2025.
Recent context: OpenAI has been regularly releasing major model updates. In September 2025, reports indicated that OpenAI shipped three significant upgrades including branching, unified Projects, and Codex IDE updates, suggesting continued development of their core models.
Resolution criteria: This market will resolve based on official announcements from OpenAI's website, blog, or social media accounts. The model must be a new flagship model (not just an incremental update) and must be made available to at least some subset of users (API access, ChatGPT Plus subscribers, or general public).
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ120 | |
| 2 | Ṁ36 | |
| 3 | Ṁ24 | |
| 4 | Ṁ18 | |
| 5 | Ṁ12 |
People are also trading
@Jasonb imo 5.1 is meant to be the spiritual successor to 4o, when 5 was the successor to something more like o1. If they remove 4o as a result of 5.1 before any other releases, would this count as "successor to GPT-4o"?
@JoeandSeth It's not really a new flagship model though? It's just an incremental update to GPT 5
@Jasonb incremental updates have been made to 4o over the months. A new model version seems to me to be flagship?
@Jasonb @JoeandSeth @mjau yeah I placed a large YES bet today then almost immediately sold it because of exactly that ambiguous wording. My hunch was it might resolve based on the creator's whims. I reckon it may resolve NO just because it isn't an unambiguous YES.
FWIW Chatgpt also doesn't seem to be clear on whether 5.1 is a 'flagship' or 'incremental':
https://chatgpt.com/share/69177ba0-9054-8005-9c65-3058efb8d6f4
@JoeandSeth Right but this isn't 5o, it's 5.1, it's an incremental update to 5. Reading this post it's clear that this basically just a tweaked version of 5 to be a little better in some ways.
@Jasonb several incremental updates to 4o were still called 4o.
A flagship update after 3 was 3.5, then 4, then 4.5, and then 5.
Do you claim than the 4 -> 4-turbo -> 4o path were all incremental changes?