Round 1
One saved weekly assessment of Dark energy stays within 0.05 of w = −1 over redshifts zero to two in the CPL model., kept as it was published. It is an estimate from three models reading the evidence, not proof the hypothesis holds, and it did not set any price.
- Published
- Oct 19, 2026 06:59 PM EDT
- Estimate
- 13%
- Range the models covered
- 3–20%
- Confident binary
- No unanimous verdict this round.
- Methodology
- panel-v9
- Round hash
96a74a2065713b5860e6a917cd22a4633b40a7d5ee17b7dcd0a914afe0897efd
The hash commits to this round's recorded bytes. It does not prove the wording is sound or that the science is right.
openai/gpt-6.1-sol
DESI DR2 favors evolving dark energy, lowering support for the narrow endpoint bounds, but significance against exact ΛCDM does not establish exclusion of this finite region. I interpret independence as different observations, not different analyses of DESI. I could not verify two qualifying independent, systematics-inclusive profile-confidence tests with free neutrino mass, nor a signed evidence cutoff; neither terminal criterion is established.
What would change this view: Two independent observational combinations yielding systematic-inclusive, free-neutrino-mass profile regions wholly inside or wholly outside the endpoint bounds would substantially change my estimate.
anthropic/claude-sonnet-5.5
Current joint 95% (w0,wa) regions are far larger than the narrow strip near (-1,0) that the two ±0.05 conditions define. DESI DR2 reports w0 uncertainties of roughly 0.05–0.2 and wa uncertainties of several tenths, so no region fits inside the strip. YES is therefore unmet. NO also fails: BAO-only or other weaker combinations still overlap the strip, and the combinations share DESI BAO and CMB data, so they are not independent. I did not run a live search, so this rests on my recall of DESI DR2.
What would change this view: A future independent BAO+SN+CMB analysis with 95% w0 and wa errors of order 0.03 centred near (-1,0) would raise YES. Independent, non-overlapping combinations all excluding the strip would support NO.
No sources recorded for this answer.
x-ai/grok-4.7
Peer-reviewed DESI DR2 finds a w0>-1, wa<0 solution preferred over a cosmological constant at 2.8–4.2σ for BAO+CMB+SNe, which pulls against both |Δw|≤0.05 endpoint cuts. The available results do not show every independent joint 95% (w0,wa) region wholly inside or wholly disjoint from their intersection, and no non-overlapping reproduction meets that bar.
What would change this view: Two independent BAO+SN+CMB 95% (w0,wa) regions, systematics included, all wholly inside or all disjoint from both cuts.
Round 1: score 0.13
OpenAI estimated 0.20. DESI DR2 favors evolving dark energy, lowering support for the narrow endpoint bounds, but significance against exact ΛCDM does not establish exclusion of this finite region. I interpret independence as different… Anthropic estimated 0.03. Current joint 95% (w0,wa) regions are far larger than the narrow strip near (-1,0) that the two ±0.05 conditions define. DESI DR2 reports w0 uncertainties of roughly 0.05–0.2 and wa uncertainties of several tenths, so… xAI estimated 0.15. Peer-reviewed DESI DR2 finds a w0>-1, wa<0 solution preferred over a cosmological constant at 2.8–4.2σ for BAO+CMB+SNe, which pulls against both |Δw|≤0.05 endpoint cuts. The available results do not show every… The panel disagreed by 0.17, so read this average as soft. The three models did not return a unanimous confident binary, so the market is not decided.
No audit bundle is recorded for this round. A bundle from another round is not substituted for it.