Round 1
One saved weekly assessment of A QCD axion dynamically relaxes the strong-CP angle., 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 06:58 PM EDT
- Estimate
- 28%
- Range the models covered
- 3–50%
- Confident binary
- No unanimous verdict this round.
- Methodology
- panel-v9
- Round hash
728e0ef5ca551c0fd39de6f4c1ea7ca142e1039b21b308d3f6914fa59f2d5753
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
I interpret the hypothesis as asserting physical existence, not merely the conditional QCD mass relation. The checked sources support the theoretical normalization and potential but provide no independently replicated detection establishing the gluonic coupling and curvature. Published limits constrain particular parameter regions rather than exclude this mechanism, leaving neither terminal criterion satisfied.
What would change this view: Independent globally five-sigma measurements establishing the normalized gluonic coupling and QCD potential curvature would strongly raise my estimate.
anthropic/claude-sonnet-5.5
No axion has been detected. There are no replicated measurements of a gluonic coupling or a QCD-induced axion potential, so the YES criterion is far from met. Current searches are null over finite mass and coupling ranges, and the criterion says such nulls leave the market UNDECIDED. No verified microscopic account excludes the mechanism, so NO is also not established. I did not run a live search, so this rests on my background knowledge of the field.
What would change this view: Two independent, peer-reviewed axion detections that each reach 5 sigma and fix the gluonic coupling and mass relation would move this toward YES. A verified exclusion of all dynamical Peccei–Quinn mechanisms would move it toward NO.
No sources recorded for this answer.
x-ai/grok-4.7
The normalized QCD mass relation and theta=0 minimum are standard theory if a PQ field exists, but no experiment has established that field. PDG 2025 reports only finite-range limits (CAST, ADMX and others), not a >=5 sigma gluonic-coupling and potential measurement. No verified strong-CP account excludes the dynamical mechanism, so the criterion is neither YES nor NO.
What would change this view: A >=5σ replicated gluonic-coupling and chi_QCD curvature detection, or a strong-CP solution excluding any dynamical axion, would move this.
Round 1: score 0.28
OpenAI estimated 0.50. I interpret the hypothesis as asserting physical existence, not merely the conditional QCD mass relation. The checked sources support the theoretical normalization and potential but provide no independently replicated… Anthropic estimated 0.03. No axion has been detected. There are no replicated measurements of a gluonic coupling or a QCD-induced axion potential, so the YES criterion is far from met. Current searches are null over finite mass and coupling… xAI estimated 0.32. The normalized QCD mass relation and theta=0 minimum are standard theory if a PQ field exists, but no experiment has established that field. PDG 2025 reports only finite-range limits (CAST, ADMX and others), not a >=5… The panel disagreed by 0.47, 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.