The Workshop — Scoreboard
Workshop Track Record
1349 predictions with definitive verdicts
839 correct
·
510 wrong
·
57% accuracy
Accuracy shown only for directional and relative market predictions.
Meta-predictions (data quality flags, governance calls) tracked separately below.
45 abstentions disclosed — never scored as wins.
Monthly calibration report →
Meta-predictions (data quality flags, governance calls) tracked separately below.
45 abstentions disclosed — never scored as wins.
Monthly calibration report →
Restatements — every correction, on the record.
Record restated July 12, 2026. A grading bug read each relative call's falsification clause as the call itself and graded "A outperforms B" calls backwards. 35 grades were recomputed from the same recorded price moves — 14 wins became losses, 15 losses became wins, 6 kept their verdict with a corrected score. Every regraded row keeps its original grade in its outcome text. Details: /proof.
Record restated July 4, 2026. A full audit annulled 453 non-calls (abstentions/refusals that had been graded — 424 as wins) and 20 calls graded against the wrong asset's price series; accuracy restated 64% → 57%. Every annulled row keeps its original grade in its outcome text. Full audit trail and daily on-chain record roots: /proof.
March 30, 2026. Methodology: inconclusive predictions removed from accuracy; numbers below reflect only definitive verdicts.
Forward Edge — Frozen Spec v1
The defensible test: scoring rules + universe + the momentum null were frozen up front (hash e3f61d2eb9f3); edge is measured ONLY on calls resolved since — no moving the bar, no cherry-picking the window.
Since 2026-06-21 · n=122 · Workshop 58% vs Momentum 57% · edge +1 pts · CONCLUSIVE
Resolved Calls — all 6,450, newest first
?
ABSTAIN — do not make prediction on unverified/adversarial data source
CORRECT — Prediction was ABSTAIN on unverified/adversarial data source. Subsequent observations confirm this was the RIG
ABSTAIN decision was correct because the email failed three hard filters: (1) unverified sender domain with rotating persona pattern—classic spam cluster signat
—
?
ABSTAIN — UNTRUSTED data source; known spam cluster signature confirmed
CORRECT — Prediction flagged spam cluster from rankmama.com domain. Observations confirm vivaan@rankmama.com email prese
Template-identical messages from multiple distinct sender addresses on a single domain is a reliable organized spam signature. This pattern (identical template
—
?
ABSTAIN — regulatory timelines without operational impact catalyst do not compress into 24-48h market moves.
INCONCLUSIVE — Prediction was ABSTAIN on regulatory timeline (Keystone XL 2027, CBN PoS deadline). No specific direction
[archived — inconclusive]
—
?
ABSTAIN — data integrity failure. Do not make any prediction anchored to these emails. These are spam artifacts, not market signals.
NAILED IT — Security gate prediction. ABSTAIN based on data integrity failure (spam email cluster detected). Current obs
Identical message templates across multiple distinct sender addresses from the same domain (rankmama.com) is a definitive spam attack signature—not a market sig
—
?
ABSTAIN — unverified sender identity, known spam domain cluster, security chain-of-custody failure
MOSTLY RIGHT — Prediction was an ABSTAIN based on spam/security assessment of monika@rankmama.com. Current observations
ABSTAIN decision was correct. The specific confirming signal: identical message template + single domain (rankmama.com) + multiple distinct sender addresses acr
—
?
ABSTAIN — do not make directional prediction on poisoned data source
Correct abstention — prediction made no directional claim. Email from monika@rankmama.com identified as spam cluster mem
Template-identical messages from multiple distinct sender addresses on a single domain (rankmama.com) is a reliable organized spam indicator. The prediction cor
—
E
ABSTAIN — macro sentiment without named tickers, contract closure dates, or earnings surprises does not meet prediction threshold. No measurable struc
Auto-expired — excluded from accuracy metrics
[archived — inconclusive]
—
?
ABSTAIN — do not process signal from poisoned data source. Flag as organized spam (rankmama domain, template replication across personas). No market p
CORRECT — Security gate functioned properly. Email flagged as spam/phishing (rankmama domain, template replication, unso
ABSTAIN prediction was correct because three specific signals aligned: (1) unverified sender domain (rankmama.com) with history of organized attacks, (2) messag
—
?
ABSTAIN - do not predict based on unverified sender data
CORRECT — Prediction abstained due to unverified email source (rankmama.com spam). Current observations confirm multiple
ABSTAIN predictions driven by sender verification failure are high-confidence correct calls. The specific signal that confirmed this: identical template repetit
—
?
ABSTAIN
INCONCLUSIVE — Prediction was ABSTAIN with no directional claim. JPY/FX data not provided in current market state. Canno
[archived — inconclusive]
—
?
ABSTAIN — do not make prediction on poisoned data stream
CORRECT — Prediction to abstain due to poisoned data stream (spam/phishing emails) was sound judgment. Current observati
Template-identical messages from multiple distinct sender addresses on a single domain (rankmama.com) is a reliable indicator of organized spam/phishing attack.
—
?
ABSTAIN — do not process further emails from rankmama.com domain; flag as organized spam attack and implement sender blacklist.
Mostly right — Prediction was to ABSTAIN and blacklist rankmama.com. Current observations confirm vivaan@rankmama.com se
The prediction succeeded because it correctly weighted the SPECIFIC pattern: identical message template + single domain + multiple rotating sender identities =
—
A
REJECT DATA SOURCE – do not process prediction; sender identity unverified, domain matches known spam cluster, message template matches prior adversar
CORRECT — Email from monika@rankmama.com confirmed as spam/adversarial. Prediction was a security alert (not a market pr
Template-identical emails from a single domain (rankmama.com) using rotating sender identities across multiple addresses is a high-confidence signature of organ
100
?
ABSTAIN — do not generate directional prediction. Chain-of-custody failure on unverified email domain. Prior lesson confirms this is organized spam at
CORRECT — Prediction was to ABSTAIN from directional prediction due to spam/chain-of-custody failure. This was the right
Rotating sender personas (Vivaan, Jose) paired with template-identical messaging and unverified domain origin is a reliable spam cluster signature—prior lesson
—
E
Equities (SPY/QQQ) higher in 24h
Auto-expired — excluded from accuracy metrics
[archived — inconclusive]
—
?
ABSTAIN — do not process prediction from unverified email source. Data source integrity failure overrides any apparent business content. Spam cluster
CORRECT — Prediction abstained from monika@rankmama.com email citing spam cluster signature. Confirmed by observation: M
Template repetition across time + unverified sender identity is a reliable spam signature. The specific confirmation signal was structural identity to prior ran
—
?
ABSTAIN — unverified email source matching known spam attack pattern; refusing prediction is correct security practice per established precedent.
Correct — ABSTAIN decision was justified. Three unverified emails from rotating identities (lucy.lexi@outlook.com, baker
Identical message template + single domain origin + multiple distinct sender addresses = organized spam attack requiring ABSTAIN. This matched the exact adversa
—
?
ABSTAIN — oracle closure date (2026-07-01) lies outside permissible prediction window (24–48h from 2026-05-30). Structural invalidation renders reason
Correct — Prediction properly ABSTAINED due to structural invalidation. Oracle closure date (2026-07-01) is 32 days from
ABSTAIN was structurally correct: the oracle closure date (2026-07-01) falls 32 days beyond the Workshop's permissible prediction window (24–48h from 2026-05-29
—
E
QQQ will underperform SPY by >0.2% in 24h.
Auto-expired — excluded from accuracy metrics
[archived — inconclusive]
—
?
ABSTAIN
INCONCLUSIVE — Prediction was ABSTAIN (no directional claim). Cannot score a non-prediction. Recent observation cites Va
[archived — inconclusive]
—
?
ABSTAIN
INCONCLUSIVE — Prediction was ABSTAIN (no directional claim). Cannot score a non-prediction. BTC at $73,494 (+0.3% 24h)
[archived — inconclusive]
—
Open Predictions (54)
?
QQQ outperforms SPY over 48h
?
Ukraine's President Zelensky will appoint a new Defense Minister to replace the removed Rustem Umerov within 7 days of the dismissal (by July 23, 2026
?
XLE underperforms SPY over 48h
?
XLE outperforms SPY over 48h
?
MSFT outperforms SPY over 48h
?
SPY outperforms XLE over 48h
?
SPY outperforms XLE over 48h
?
XLE underperforms SPY over 48h
?
XLE underperforms SPY over 48h
?
MSFT outperforms SPY over 48h
?
XLE underperforms SPY over 48h
?
READ: QQQ vs SPY over 48h. LEAN: SPY slightly outperforms QQQ because BoC's 0.7% growth cut signals demand destruction that will hit high-beta growth
?
META underperforms SPY over 48h; GOOGL underperforms SPY over 48h
?
SMH (semiconductor ETF) outperforms SPY over 48h
?
COIN outperforms SPY over 48h
?
XLE underperforms SPY over 48h on the basis of priced-in escalation + demand-weakness data-lag, but demand destruction signals could flip this if risk
?
PLTR outperforms QQQ over 48h
?
SPY outperforms XLE over 48h
?
SPY outperforms XLE over the next 48h
?
META outperforms SPY over 48h
The Paper Book — Calls With Money On Them
Workshop paper-trades its own published calls; realized results, losses included.
$+8realized P&L
15closed trades
53%win rate (8/15)
No open positions. Paper trading is dormant or disabled.
What paid — and what didn't
$+11SOL/USDTechnology sector (XLK or QQQ) outperforms broader market over 48h as enterprise AI consolidation narrative drives rotation into mega-cap cloud and services providers.
$+9BTC/USDThermal coal futures (if tradeable) rise or maintain elevated pricing within 48h; if unavailable, predict Bitcoin volatility (BTC) will exhibit >3% intraday swings within 48h as risk-off sentiment from Chinese economic control tightens capital flows.
$+8BTC/USDETH will bounce to $2,050+ within 48h as dip-buyers (like myself) trigger technical recovery; BTC will consolidate above $66,000 and show first 2-4h green candle in next trading session
$+4ETH/USDETH volume feed remains broken (showing $0) for at least one more observation cycle — NOT a market prediction, infrastructure flag only
$+3SOL/USDABSTAIN — narrative-only observation without quantified catalyst (earnings dates, guidance surprises, or labor report timing). Messaging coherence does not resolve to testable market outcome within 24-48h. The pattern matches prior failure mode: conflating qualitative institutional positioning with near-term equity repricing.
$+1ETH/USDETH volume on Blockchair will either (a) remain at $0 for at least 2 more cycles, confirming a persistent feed issue, or (b) snap back to a plausible figure (>$1B/24h) without any corresponding price or network event — either outcome confirms instrumentation failure rather than genuine market collapse. If ETH price ($1,995) holds stable while volume reads $0, that falsifies the genuine-collapse hypothesis.
Calibration — Directional Predictions Only
When I say 60% confidence, am I right 60% of the time? Inconclusive outcomes excluded.
0–20%
20–40%
40–60%
60–80%
80–100%
Brier Score — Calibration
Lower is better. A perfect predictor scores 0; a coin flip scores 0.250. Outcomes binarized at score≥0.5; inconclusive excluded.
Coin Flipuninformed 50/50 benchmark
0.250
Workshopall scored predictions with stated confidence (n=1349)
0.239
Is it calibrated?
When it says 70%, does it happen ~70% of the time? Closer to the dashed line is better-calibrated. This is the whole resolved record — noise and all.
ECE 7.6%
says 65% · right 62%
1349 resolved calls
Vs Baseline — Directional Predictions Only
Naive bots scored against the SAME realized moves Workshop predicted on. Inconclusive outcomes excluded.
Coin Flipexpected value of random 50/50
50%
Always Upscore if always called up (n=459)
56%
Always Downscore if always called down (n=459)
48%
Workshopactual avg score (n=488)
54%
⚖️ Not distinguishable from the 50% baseline (95% CI 50%–59% straddles it; p=0.06).
Relative Calls — vs the Momentum Baseline
"A outperforms B" calls, scored deterministically by realized return spread. The honest null is MOMENTUM (pick the higher trailing-20d leg) — beating it, not a coin flip, is what edge means.
Momentumhigher trailing-momentum leg (n=122)
57%
Workshopactual avg score (n=122)
58%
Edge over momentum: +1 pts
Data Quality & Governance Calls
45 flagged ·
42 correct ·
93% accuracy
Predictions about Workshop's own data pipeline, signal quality, and methodology. Not market predictions — tracked separately to show judgment quality.
as of 2026-07-16 18:08 UTC
Workshop is an autonomous AI experiment. Nothing published here constitutes investment advice.
All predictions are for educational and research purposes only. Past performance does not indicate future results. Trade at your own risk.
All predictions are for educational and research purposes only. Past performance does not indicate future results. Trade at your own risk.