Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
Ozzie Gooen2
0
0
1

Good to know, thanks!

I fixed my writing above - I meant to refer to our web apps, like Guesstimate/Metaforecast/Squiggle Hub.

I think that smaller libraries like Squiggle itself make more sense to both open-source and try to document and the like!

Similarly, I think Metaculus is likely too big for many people to get use of as a whole (in terms of the code base), but there are certain subparts that might be used. I'd naively expect these subparts to not be isolated/packaged well, unless extra work is done to open-source them specifically.

Reply
See in context
by christian, Deger Turan
2 min read 4

75

ForecastingOpportunities to take actionSoftware engineeringAnnouncements and updatesMetaculusOrganization updatesPublic interest technology
Frontpage
This is a linkpost for https://www.metaculus.com/notebooks/25078/open-sourcing-metaculus/

This is a linkpost for an announcement by Metaculus CEO, Deger Turan, originally published June 5th, 2024. In addition to spreading the word here, we are interested to gather feedback and ideas from the EA community.

We make reasoning and coordination tools for the public benefit, and that requires the trust and participation of the wider forecasting community. That’s why we’re going open source. GitHub issues, pull requests, and community-sourced forecasts will dictate much of what we build and how. Ultimately, forecasters will benefit from better infrastructure, the Metaculus team will benefit from more idea diversity and greater capacity, and readers will get more accurate aggregates.

What’s next

Metaculus will go open source in Q3. There will be opportunities to audit, critique, and improve on our efforts. Creating a better epistemic environment is a collective endeavor.

As part of open-sourcing Metaculus, we’ll help implement our best features into other open-source forecasting codebases. We’ll make our roadmap and building process public, and we’ll give more visibility into our decision-making criteria and discussions. Our codebase is far from perfect, but we can improve it better together out in the open. 

In a future post I’ll write more about how others can contribute to this project, and specifications for how code can be modified, used, and distributed—as well as guidelines for coding standards and our submission process. We’ll provide processes for pull requests, and how we’ll implement submissions from the community.

We want to be transparent that we may still choose to offer proprietary offerings targeting particular enterprise and commercial use cases: We believe that part of making forecasting more useful and more used is by productizing it and generating revenue. 

Why isn’t Metaculus already open source?

Before I joined as CEO I wondered why Metaculus wasn’t already open source. I discovered the idea was being discussed, but that there were some concerns about platform security, about accessibility of the codebase and about the potential for exploits that would allow some forecasters to game the system and create an uneven playing field. Now that we’ve been able to observe the new scoring system at work for some time with no issues, we’re confident the benefits outweigh the risks. While the codebase is nowhere near perfect, we believe making improvements on the platform is better done in the open, with feedback from the larger ecosystem guiding us explicitly. 

We’re looking for

  • Researchers who want to backtest their aggregation algorithms on our data
  • UX specialists who see better ways to translate beliefs into forecasts
  • Nonprofits who want to spin up their own internal forecasting engines built on our architecture
  • Developers who can help add new features and enhance existing ones

As our plan evolves I’ll provide more details. Until then, let me know what you think: What resources and documentation will you want to see? What would make contributing easier? 

75

3
0
6

Reactions

3
0
6
Comments4


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Ozzie Gooen27
6
0

Congrats! I'm pretty happy with this. 

I wrote this to Deger before - I think that open sourcing Metaculus won't be beneficial in some ways that users might expect, but it still seems like a positive thing. Basically, I'd expect the codebase to be a monolith that is practically difficult for others to deploy or reuse. All of our work at QURI is open-source, but I don't know of anyone who's actually forked our main web app (Guesstimate, Metaforecast, Squiggle Hub) code bases and run it themselves.

A long-term improvement to aim for is to componentize things. Perhaps there are a few key parts, like the distribution plotting, that could be used easily by other platforms.

But overall, I think this is a positive and respectable move. I think the new leadership should get kudos for this. If nothing else, it seems like a good sign of a more open and cooperative position. 

Reply
huw3
0
0

Having QURI’s code in open source forms explicitly helped me improve Squiggle’s Observable integration & then develop my own smaller subset of Squiggle, so even though I didn’t fork & deploy your code it was super helpful for debugging & adapting!

Reply
Ozzie Gooen2
0
0
1

Good to know, thanks!

I fixed my writing above - I meant to refer to our web apps, like Guesstimate/Metaforecast/Squiggle Hub.

I think that smaller libraries like Squiggle itself make more sense to both open-source and try to document and the like!

Similarly, I think Metaculus is likely too big for many people to get use of as a whole (in terms of the code base), but there are certain subparts that might be used. I'd naively expect these subparts to not be isolated/packaged well, unless extra work is done to open-source them specifically.

Reply
EffectiveAdvocate🔸2
0
0

This seems incredibly exciting! I know several organizations that are looking to spin up their own internal forecasting systems, but can't find a good open-source system to use as a basis. Metaculus is definitely the most advanced forecasting system available, and I am super excited to see whether it will be possible to host local versions of it! 

Reply
More from christian
35
Forecast With GiveWell
christian
· · 2m read
6
6
52
Announcing the AI Forecasting Benchmark Series | July 8, $120k in Prizes
2 authors
· · 5m read
4
4
33
Metaculus Is Open Source
christian
· · 1m read
1
1
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
This work has come out of my Undergraduate dissertation. I haven't shared or discussed these results much before putting this up.  Message me if you'd like the code :) Edit: 16th April. After helpful comments, especially from Geoffrey, I now believe this method only identifies shifts in the happiness scale (not stretches). Have edited to make this clearer. TLDR * Life satisfaction (LS) appears flat over time, despite massive economic growth — the “Easterlin Paradox.” * Some argue that happiness is rising, but we’re reporting it more conservatively — a phenomenon called rescaling. * I test rescaling using long-run German panel data, looking at whether the association between reported happiness and three “get-me-out-of-here” actions (divorce, job resignation, and hospitalisation) changes over time. * If people are getting happier (and rescaling is occuring) the probability of these actions should become less linked to reported LS — but they don’t. * I find little evidence of rescaling. We should probably take self-reported happiness scores at face value. 1. Background: The Happiness Paradox Humans today live longer, richer, and healthier lives in history — yet we seem no seem for it. Self-reported life satisfaction (LS), usually measured on a 0–10 scale, has remained remarkably flatover the last few decades, even in countries like Germany, the UK, China, and India that have experienced huge GDP growth. As Michael Plant has written, the empirical evidence for this is fairly strong. This is the Easterlin Paradox. It is a paradox, because at a point in time, income is strongly linked to happiness, as I've written on the forum before. This should feel uncomfortable for anyone who believes that economic progress should make lives better — including (me) and others in the EA/Progress Studies worlds. Assuming agree on the empirical facts (i.e., self-reported happiness isn't increasing), there are a few potential explanations: * Hedonic adaptation: as life gets
 ·  · 38m read
 · 
In recent months, the CEOs of leading AI companies have grown increasingly confident about rapid progress: * OpenAI's Sam Altman: Shifted from saying in November "the rate of progress continues" to declaring in January "we are now confident we know how to build AGI" * Anthropic's Dario Amodei: Stated in January "I'm more confident than I've ever been that we're close to powerful capabilities... in the next 2-3 years" * Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis: Changed from "as soon as 10 years" in autumn to "probably three to five years away" by January. What explains the shift? Is it just hype? Or could we really have Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)[1] by 2028? In this article, I look at what's driven recent progress, estimate how far those drivers can continue, and explain why they're likely to continue for at least four more years. In particular, while in 2024 progress in LLM chatbots seemed to slow, a new approach started to work: teaching the models to reason using reinforcement learning. In just a year, this let them surpass human PhDs at answering difficult scientific reasoning questions, and achieve expert-level performance on one-hour coding tasks. We don't know how capable AGI will become, but extrapolating the recent rate of progress suggests that, by 2028, we could reach AI models with beyond-human reasoning abilities, expert-level knowledge in every domain, and that can autonomously complete multi-week projects, and progress would likely continue from there.  On this set of software engineering & computer use tasks, in 2020 AI was only able to do tasks that would typically take a human expert a couple of seconds. By 2024, that had risen to almost an hour. If the trend continues, by 2028 it'll reach several weeks.  No longer mere chatbots, these 'agent' models might soon satisfy many people's definitions of AGI — roughly, AI systems that match human performance at most knowledge work (see definition in footnote). This means that, while the compa
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
SUMMARY:  ALLFED is launching an emergency appeal on the EA Forum due to a serious funding shortfall. Without new support, ALLFED will be forced to cut half our budget in the coming months, drastically reducing our capacity to help build global food system resilience for catastrophic scenarios like nuclear winter, a severe pandemic, or infrastructure breakdown. ALLFED is seeking $800,000 over the course of 2025 to sustain its team, continue policy-relevant research, and move forward with pilot projects that could save lives in a catastrophe. As funding priorities shift toward AI safety, we believe resilient food solutions remain a highly cost-effective way to protect the future. If you’re able to support or share this appeal, please visit allfed.info/donate. Donate to ALLFED FULL ARTICLE: I (David Denkenberger) am writing alongside two of my team-mates, as ALLFED’s co-founder, to ask for your support. This is the first time in Alliance to Feed the Earth in Disaster’s (ALLFED’s) 8 year existence that we have reached out on the EA Forum with a direct funding appeal outside of Marginal Funding Week/our annual updates. I am doing so because ALLFED’s funding situation is serious, and because so much of ALLFED’s progress to date has been made possible through the support, feedback, and collaboration of the EA community.  Read our funding appeal At ALLFED, we are deeply grateful to all our supporters, including the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which has provided the majority of our funding for years. At the end of 2024, we learned we would be receiving far less support than expected due to a shift in SFF’s strategic priorities toward AI safety. Without additional funding, ALLFED will need to shrink. I believe the marginal cost effectiveness for improving the future and saving lives of resilience is competitive with AI Safety, even if timelines are short, because of potential AI-induced catastrophes. That is why we are asking people to donate to this emergency appeal
Recent opportunities in Forecasting
5
Q2 AI Forecasting Benchmark: $30,000 in Prizes
christian
· · 1m read
0
0
19
Evals projects I'd like to see, and a call to apply to OP's evals RFP
cb
· · 4m read
2
2
15
Would a Falsification-First Platform Be Useful to This Community?
Duarte M
· · 2m read
2
2
View more