ClaimsScott Alexander

“I will be involved in at least one published/accepted-to-publish research paper by the end of 2017: 50%”

Scott Alexander, blogger 6 January 2017 Predictions For 2017 (Slate Star Codex)

Prediction Their own work or organisation

Scott Alexander gave a 50% probability that he would be involved in at least one published or accepted-to-publish research paper by the end of 2017.

Unresolvable The public record could not settle it.

Prediction: Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?

What would count as true or false

This is judged on whether he made the prediction. TRUE if his 2017 predictions post (dated about 6 Jan 2017) lists 'I will be involved in at least one published/accepted-to-publish research paper by the end of 2017' at 50%. MOSTLY TRUE if the item appears at 50% with slightly different wording. MOSTLY FALSE if a similar item appears at a different probability. FALSE if the post contains no such prediction.

Set before the research began.

Evidence (1)

  1. E1 2017 Predictions: Calibration Results Slate Star Codex · 2 January 2018 Own record

    “Strikethrough’d are false. Intact are true. Italicized are getting thrown out because I can’t decide if they’re true or not.”

Reasoning

The only evidence, E2, is Scott Alexander's 2018 post scoring his 2017 predictions. The quoted text explains only how the post marks predictions (strikethrough for false, intact for true, italics for thrown out). It does not include the research-paper item or any probability attached to it. Nothing provided shows that the 2017 predictions post listed this item at 50%, so the claim cannot be resolved.

Cite this claim

Scott Alexander, “Scott Alexander gave a 50% probability that he would be involved in at least one published or accepted-to-publish research paper by the end of 2017.” (said 6 January 2017). Verdict: unresolvable. Reliability API, claim c_89a6fd15bd3c, method 0.1.0+8bea457b, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_89a6fd15bd3c

This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.

Reply to this claim

For Scott Alexander, or someone speaking for them: a correction or counter-evidence. Replies are read before anything is shown; an approved reply shows your name, role, date, statement and link. Your email address is never shown and is deleted 30 days after the decision (privacy).

More prediction claims by Scott Alexander

  1. Resolved true Prediction 15 February 2018
    “I actually remember and grade these predictions publicly sometime in the year 2023: 90%”

    Scott Alexander gave a 90% probability that he would remember and publicly grade these predictions sometime in 2023.

  2. Mostly true Prediction 3 April 2025
    “Our scenario focuses on coding in particular because we think coding is what starts the intelligence explosion.”

    The authors of the scenario think coding is what will start the intelligence explosion.

  3. Mostly true Prediction 3 April 2025
    “We expect that as the AI labs become more capable, they tell the government about this because they want government contracts, they want government support.”

    In the AI 2027 scenario, as AI labs become more capable they tell the government, seeking government contracts and support.

  4. Mostly true Prediction 3 April 2025
    “In our scenario, that starts with cyber warfare, the government sees that these AIs are now as capable as the best human hackers, but can be deployed at humongous scale.”

    In the AI 2027 scenario, the government sees via cyber warfare that AIs are as capable as the best human hackers but deployable at huge scale.

  5. Resolved true Prediction 3 April 2025
    “So they become extremely interested and they discuss nationalizing the AI companies.”

    In the AI 2027 scenario, the government becomes extremely interested in AI and discusses nationalizing the AI companies.

All of them

Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.