跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2610.36639 · v1

Whether Is Not When: Separating Occurrence from Timing in Polymarket Prices

首次提交 2026-10-27 12:54
版本更新 2026-10-27 12:54
雷达观测 2026-10-29 00:35
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Prices formed by Web users on Polymarket, a blockchain-based prediction market, are now cited in the news and in a U.S. Army intelligence bulletin as early warnings of geopolitical events. However, it remains unclear whether these prices can serve as such warnings. This cannot be judged from accuracy, because most markets resolve No and accuracy can remain high even when many of the events that did happen are missed. In this paper, we study this question from two aspects, using all 1.24 billion on-chain trades in 2.37 million Polymarket markets through September 2026. First, from 3,686 markets on geopolitical conflicts, we derive 208 unscheduled events that did happen and measure how far in advance prices move before the first Web report of each event. Second, we separate the information in prices about whether an event happens from the information about when it happens. To do so, we group 1,551 contracts into 338 deadline ladders and read each ladder as one forecast of the event date. We then split its log score, and the profit of 9.3 million trades by 491,000 accounts, exactly into these two parts. We find that one day before they were reported, prices correctly predicted only 56% of the geopolitical events but all 51 scheduled central-bank decisions. Separating the two parts shows that only about one eighth of the information in prices concerns timing. A small group of large accounts earns timing profits, but beyond current prices, no group of accounts helps predict an event within days. A high price is therefore a sign that an event is likely rather than imminent. Near-term warnings read from the whole ladder are more often right than those read from a single contract. Platforms should report recall alongside accuracy, and show near-term probabilities read from the whole ladder.

作者备注:11 pages, 6 figures

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-10-27 12:54 · 最新观测版本

Whether Is Not When: Separating Occurrence from Timing in Polymarket Prices

Prices formed by Web users on Polymarket, a blockchain-based prediction market, are now cited in the news and in a U.S. Army intelligence bulletin as early warnings of geopolitical events. However, it remains unclear whether these prices can serve as such warnings. This cannot be judged from accuracy, because most markets resolve No and accuracy can remain high even when many of the events that did happen are missed. In this paper, we study this question from two aspects, using all 1.24 billion on-chain trades in 2.37 million Polymarket markets through September 2026. First, from 3,686 markets on geopolitical conflicts, we derive 208 unscheduled events that did happen and measure how far in advance prices move before the first Web report of each event. Second, we separate the information in prices about whether an event happens from the information about when it happens. To do so, we group 1,551 contracts into 338 deadline ladders and read each ladder as one forecast of the event date. We then split its log score, and the profit of 9.3 million trades by 491,000 accounts, exactly into these two parts. We find that one day before they were reported, prices correctly predicted only 56% of the geopolitical events but all 51 scheduled central-bank decisions. Separating the two parts shows that only about one eighth of the information in prices concerns timing. A small group of large accounts earns timing profits, but beyond current prices, no group of accounts helps predict an event within days. A high price is therefore a sign that an event is likely rather than imminent. Near-term warnings read from the whole ladder are more often right than those read from a single contract. Platforms should report recall alongside accuracy, and show near-term probabilities read from the whole ladder.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗