ArticlePloS one2024
Joint-outcome prediction markets for climate risks.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predicting future climate requires the integration of knowledge and expertise from a wide range of disciplines. Predictions must account for climate-change mitigation policies which may depend on climate predictions. This interdependency, or "circularity", means that climate predictions must be conditioned on emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Long-range forecasts also suffer from information asymmetry because users cannot use track records to judge the skill of providers. The problems of aggregation, circularity, and information asymmetry can be addressed using prediction markets with joint-outcome spaces, allowing simultaneous forecasts of GHG concentrations and temperature. The viability of prediction markets with highly granular, joint-outcome spaces was tested with markets for monthly UK rainfall and temperature. The experiments demonstrate these markets can aggregate the judgments of experts with relevant expertise, and suggest similarly structured markets, with longer horizons, could provide a mechanism to produce credible forecasts of climate-related risks for policy making, planning, and risk disclosure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.