SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " prediction " 1,881 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Fantasy Football Sleepers, Busts & Predictions: 2026 Philadelphia Eagles
This year promises to be a big year of transition in Philadelphia. A.J. Brown is gone, and Makai Lemon, Dontayvion Wicks and Hollywood Brown are here now. Kevin Patullo and Jeff Stoutland are gone as offensive coordinator and offensive line…
Soviet institutes, Martian neighbours, Whovian science, stellar patterns and dystopian predictions: micro reviews of recent books
Condensed natter: Physics World editors give their compressed verdicts on top new books
Is gambling the reason we have pro sports?
To hear author David Bockino tell it, gambling has always been a key ingredient of pro sports in the U.S.—it’s as American as apple pie. Bockino is the author of the new book Over/Under: An Unexpected History of Sports Betting. So what gave rise to this new wave of sports gambling? And what are we risking placing so many bets on games? Fact checking by Sierra Juarez. Your Next Listen — Prediction markets are threatening national security. Who’s gonna fix it? Connect with The Indicator — Sign up for The Indicator’s brand new newsletter — Buy the Planet Money book — Find our socials, YouTube and more! — For sponsor-free episodes, subscribe to NPR+
NBA offseason bold predictions: Stars on the move, LeBron James leaves Lakers, Draft shocker and more
The NBA offseason has arrived, and plenty of big moves will be made over the coming weeks... so let's get bold
People are betting on elections. Congress is watching
As prediction markets stir debate over betting on politics, the Los Angeles mayoral race raised a new question: What happens when people wager on elections?
Novig wins CFTC approval as competition intensifies in sports prediction markets
Novig is building a peer-to-peer sports trading platform that allows users to trade directly against one another rather than bet against the house.
Flutter Entertainment is called undervalued by Wedbush
Wedbush starts Flutter (FLUT) at Outperform, citing FanDuel’s U.S. strength and prediction market upside after a 50% drop.
Prediction markets are opening many new opportunities for unregulated insider trading and unethical bets – in the name of making a game out of politics
The rapidly growing popularity of prediction markets is sparking worries about the markets’ effects on US politics, where campaign staff has bet on its candidate’s electoral performance.
NFL Analyst Makes Prediction for Bucs' Season
Former Super Bowl champion Logan Ryan envisions a dominant NFC South run for Tampa Bay, forecasting a double-digit win season fueled by Todd Bowles’ sophisticated defensive schemes.
Roundup: The Results From Our Xbox Games Showcase 2026 Predictions
They seemed like safe-ish bets, but we didn't do that well!
Amputated, one-eyed and unstoppable: how a lion stunned scientists with new hunting tricks - Futura-Sciences
A Lion’s Journey of Survival For years in Queen Elizabeth National Park, western Uganda, a gravely mutilated lion has managed to defy every prediction. Living with only three legs and a single eye, left almost entirely to his own devices, Jacob the lion somehow found a way to stay alive....
Interpretable AI in materials discovery: Uncovering how models make predictions
A method to interpret artificial intelligence (AI) models used in materials discovery by analyzing their learned features has been developed by researchers from Japan. The method extracts key features from an AI model trained on atomic structural data and optical absorption spectra, and then groups materials with similar structural and spectral characteristics. This approach can be extended to reveal how atomic arrangements influence other material properties, paving the way for more efficient materials design.
New Steelers safety shares bold prediction for 2026 season
New Pittsburgh Steelers safety Jaquan Brisker has high hopes for the 2026 season, as he predicts the defense could become a top-three unit in the NFL.
MLB Predictions and Moneyline Picks for Saturday, June 13
MLB expert Phil Naessens offers a moneyline prediction for all 15 games on Saturday's massive card!
In Retrospect: Poland, Russia, Europe
In April I spent a few days with Zryw, a Polish non-profit organization that recruits young people to enter politics and public life. Their aim is to build a new generation of civic leaders in Poland. I’ve followed their evolution from the beginning; my son is one of the founders. (“Zryw” means “impulse” or “burst of speed” in Polish). Julie Chmielewska, one of Zryw’s leaders, interviewed me at the event. Here is the conversation, lightly edited for grammar and context: Julia Chmielewska: Assuming that culture shapes institutions, could we conclude that some cultures are more prone to authoritarianism? Anne Applebaum: I don’t think so. Every culture, every nation, and every country has the potential for change. When we look at history, we can see that nations do change. Poland has changed, for example, from the 1980s to today. There’s a completely different mentality here than the one I encountered when I first visited, in 1988. The current generation sees the world through a different frame. So no, I don’t believe that certain nations are doomed to authoritarianism, or to anything. Of course, there are political and cultural traditions, but they can always be challenged. JC: So do you think there’s something intrinsic in human nature that pushes people to democracy, freedom? AA: I think there is something in human nature, a deep instinct, that pushes people towards freedom, yes. People who live in authoritarian countries – and I’ve heard this from them over and over again – sooner or later find themselves angered by a feeling of helplessness. They can see the unfairness of crooked courts, irrational political decisions. They naturally dislike the fact that somebody has all the power while they have none. In those circumstances, people who have no political background at all sometimes are politicized just by that frustration. I’m thinking of Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, for example, who was a Belarusian housewife, until the circumstances of her husband’s arrest forced her to become a politician. I met a woman who is a Uyghur from China, and who had come to live in Turkey. After several of her family members were arrested, she too was propelled into a political role. These kinds of experiences make people interested in democracy or political reform, even if they thought they didn’t care. I also think that the opposite is true: some people instinctively prefer homogeneity, order, hierarchy. They don’t like the confrontation of opinions or the noise of debate, and they lean towards a single leader or a unified regime. I think that most of modern history is shaped by the clash between those two different sides of human nature. JC: Which force do you find more powerful today? AA: I think they both have a lot of power and there’s no way of predicting who wins. Even in countries that seem very shut off or stuck in an authoritarian system can change. We’ve seen that happen. And vice versa, I think democracies can also begin to fail and slide into authoritarianism. So it’s very important not to be complacent in either direction. JC: I want to go into your history and your experiences. You’ve lived in Russia during a time of incredible change in the late 80s, and then you came back to do research in post-Soviet Russia. AA: I was a student in Russia just before the collapse of the Soviet Union. I then traveled and worked there extensively in the 1990s, and I met people who really were full of hope. They hoped that Russia could become a democracy, or at least a place that guaranteed freedom of speech, freedom of the press. These weren’t ideas that came from Washington. Although now the narrative in the Kremlin is different, I met many people who were working towards exactly that kind of transformation. A friend of mine ran a series of seminars – once a year, and then later several times a year, in cities all over Russia – designed to get people to discuss politics in new ways. She invited young politicians and journalists, as well as foreigners. I went to many of them, in Moscow as well as Volgograd and Novosibirsk. Over two decades, hundreds of people came to these seminars, and all of them wanted Russia to be different. I remain convinced that many Russians still want Russia to be different. It’s just that the old system, in the form of Putin, a representative of that system, returned. The KGB reimposed their power. And this wasn’t because of something to do with culture, this was to do with money and politics, and who was in charge. JC: You’ve partially answered my question... I wanted to ask whether that excitement of the 1990s was an exception from the Russian historical norm which has been rather authoritarian? AA: Of course, if you look at the history of Russia since the 18th century, there have always been liberal groups, reformers and revolutionaries. There were the Decembrists, in the early 19th century, and the rural populists later on, who tried to organize the peasantry. A significant group of liberal Russians appeared at the turn of the 20th century, people like the father of the writer Vladimir Nabokov, who was a Russian politician before the revolution. These groups were small in number, but sometimes had a broader significance. The Russian dissident movement in the 1950s and 1960s actually invented the modern human rights movement. It was their idea to hold the leaders of the Soviet Union accountable for the language they used, to remind them of the treaties they had signed and the promised they had made. They created the Helsinki group, for example, that held Soviet leadership to the language of the Helsinki Treaty, which formally ended the Second World War and which contained guarantees of human rights, at least on paper. That idea spread to Eastern Europe, and similar tactics were used here in Poland. (Benjamin Nathans recently wrote a great book about the Soviet dissidents, To the Success of Our Hopeless Cause) JC: But seemingly, even if they do ever get power, they could never hold on to it. AA: We don’t know, because they have never really had power. But in any case, we also don’t know what will happen in the future. There is no reason to assume that Russia will forever be condemned to totalitarianism. Even during the first fifteen years of Putin’s regime there was some form of democratic politics. Only when the full-scale war began did he bring everything to an end: he shut down all remaining independent organizations and killed his most important opponent, Alexi Navalny. But does that mean he is popular, that he enjoys legitimacy? Even now, we don’t really know what Russians think about him, or about the war. There is no way of doing real polling in Russia because nobody will answer an independent pollster over the phone. JC: Do you think that the flock of young people, especially young men, who fled Russia after the start of the war represent a continuation of liberal movements that refuse to partake in the authoritarian state, or do you think they are moving for the sake of self-preservation – “I don’t want to go to the army, so I leave”? AA: I’m sure it’s both. I actually know many people who left Russia for political reasons either in the very last years before the war, or else just after the war began. JC: And do you see a change in the young generation versus the old one that have fled? AA: It’s hard for me to say because the people who I know were mostly already politicized. I do know some younger people who left, but most of them were already either active in the opposition, or working as journalists. Many of them very self-consciously think of themselves as maintaining Russian culture abroad, just as in the 20th century the Soviet dissidents or the anti-communist White Russians once thought of themselves as people who maintained the true Russian culture, outside of Bolshevik Russia. JC: Let’s move on to Poland. One of your first experiences with Poland was reporting on Margaret Thatcher’s first state visit, in the autumn of 1988. You followed her around the farmers’ market. AA: She was making a symbolic gesture. She wanted to welcome free markets, but the only one she could really visit was the farmers’ market at Hala Mirowska. JC: And I want to talk about this area because today you can look out of any window in that district, Mirów, and see rows and rows of skyscrapers. How does it feel to see a country built from the ground in such a short time, both politically and economically? AA: You know, when you’re living in a period of dramatic change, it’s always hard to know whether the change is positive or negative. The transformation in Poland created winners and losers, as well as new classes of people, new political movements of different kinds. At the time, it sometimes just felt like turbulence. Now, we can look back at the 1990s and early 2000s in Poland and see in retrospect that the country was headed in towards prosperity and European integration. In around 2009 or 2010, I remember speaking to a woman who worked cleaning government offices, and who asked me if her daughter should study in Amsterdam or in London. This seemed to me to be a real transformation, and it happened very fast: within a few years, Poles stopped feeling like second-class Europeans, and a generation of younger Poles appeared who had no qualms about crossing borders. JC: We again live in turbulent times. Do you think we’re heading towards positive outcomes? AA: I can’t make predictions, because everything that happens tomorrow depends on what people do today. Also, history doesn’t have a trajectory. It doesn’t move in a particular direction. You only think it does afterwards. As I said, you can look afterwards at Poland in the 1990s and you could say this was a period of great progress. But not everybody at the time saw that. Sometimes people are very wrong about a given country’s trajectory. I remember people writing about Ukraine in the 1990s, about how dangerous it was that Ukraine was independent, that this was going to be an anti-semitic state, that Ukrainian nationalism was going to come back... and although you can say many bad things about Ukraine, the country made many bad choices, actually it became a pretty tolerant state which now has a Jewish president and until recently a Muslim defense minister. JC: In the 1990s Poland’s and Ukraine’s GDP were roughly similar. Ukraine was even a bit richer. So the starting point was similar for both of these countries, but they’ve turned out very, very differently. Even if we stop in 2014. Why do you think Ukraine “chose East”? Was it external influence? AA: No, I think Ukraine was in a different position. First of all, central and eastern Ukraine had been part of the Soviet Union since the 1920s, and had therefore experienced a longer period of occupation, repression, Sovietization and even Russification. Ukraine did not have, as Poland did, an alternative elite: a large cadre of economists and politicians, who already had some experience in opposition politics and in independent thinking. In Poland, the transformative finance minister, Leszek Balcerowicz, had already thought about how an economy might be decentralized before he took office. We can argue about how successful he was, but at least he was prepared to try something new. In Ukraine, people weren’t prepared. For one, there hadn’t been much space even for an illegal opposition in the previous couple of decades. Ukraine was also in many ways still emerging from colonial occupation. For the previous couple of centuries, many of the most capable Ukrainians had moved to Russia, and the first generation of leaders in independent Ukraine tended to be former Soviet apparatchiks. They didn’t immediately seek to become closer to western Europe. Instead, they looked for some kind of economic and political “third way” and an accomodation with Russia. Ukraine became stuck in this position, half-in, half-out and became pretty profoundly corrupt. JC: The Polish alternative elite had a vision of where they wanted the country to go. I think the general perception now is that this vision ends with the next election, right? Is this a natural process of gaining power? AA: Their vision, and it was shared by the time by politicians who now call themselves both left and right, was that Poland should join the EU and NATO, as fast as possible. My husband (Radek Sikorski) was in the very first government that said it wanted to join NATO. At the time this was taken very badly in Washington: the demand for NATO membership absolutely came from Poland, not from the US. But even then, in the early 1990s, many Poles already understood that the Russian sphere of influence would grow once again, that it was important to become part of the transatlantic alliance and an integrated Europe as fast as possible: NATO, the EU, the Council of Europe, all of the trading and security alliances. That consensus lasted through several different governments and over many years, even governments containing former communists. For twenty years, right, left and center disagreed about many things, but they all agreed on the direction that the country should go. In retrospect, that consensus created the basis for prosperity in Poland. JC: And regarding the Polish-Ukrainian relations. We know that antagonisms, e.g. the myth of Wołyń [a massacre of Poles that took place in what is now Western Ukraine, in 1943] are increasingly used in Polish political discourse today. In Ukraine, nationalist historians make heroes out of UPA, the Ukrainian revolutionary army, which is held responsible for this tragedy. Where do you see a start for burying the hatchet? Is the reconciliation of our nations possible? AA: So here’s a strange thing: For more than a decade after they both gained independence, Poland and Ukraine participated in a number of projects that were designed to solve exactly these kinds of Polish-Ukrainian differences. Books were published that were jointly written by Polish and Ukrainian historians, monuments were built. These projects were successful: If you’d asked me this question in 2010, I would have said that there are no real historical issues between Poland and Ukraine, that the two countries had mostly reconciled. For a number of reasons, this began to shift. In Poland, children and grandchildren of victims of the Wołyń massacre felt their tragedy hadn’t been fully recognized. In Ukraine, nationalist groups wanted the UPA partisans who had fought against the Soviet Union recognized for their heroism, despite the fact that some in this broad and not well-defined group were also linked to Wołyń. In both eastern Poland and western Ukraine, the memory of the ethnic cleansing that took place there in the late 1940s - Poles were moved West, Ukrainians East - to accomodate new borders has left feelings of displacement and bitterness. The wave of Ukrainian immigration, which started before the war, may have provoked some of this. But don’t underestimate the role played by Russia, which has always wanted to create discord between Poland and Ukraine, and pumps out propaganda to that effect in both countries. Vandalism on both sides of the border, damage done to cemeteries and monuments, is sometimes carried out by provacateurs working for Russia, just to create bad feelings. The Polish-Ukrainian conflict also hides a different reality: although there are real grievances and bad memories, the truth is that the biggest tragedies both nations experienced in the twentieth century were inflicted by the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. That should unite these two countries, not divide them. JC: This week (19.04.2026 – Ed.) in Hungary we saw that using historical narratives to create grievance has no longer worked. Are you optimistic about the direction after Orban’s loss? AA: The Hungarian election was really important because it shows that people can actually resist powerful, dominant propaganda. The ruling party Fidesz controlled all of the TV, 90% of the newspapers, the constitutional court, the bureaucracy... and yet people had the nerve to vote against it and resist it. It’s also an important election because Hungary created a huge network of well-funded think tanks and foundations that were funding other far right groups and projects. So that loss is going to have a knock-on effect in other places too, maybe even in Poland. JC: What you’ve said about resisting propaganda reminds me of one of the interviews you did about talking to Russians in the post-Soviet era who claimed that people knew that the system was lying. Why do people choose to believe in these regimes anyway? AA: Because it’s useful. Stephen Kotkin, an American historian, once described how people would learn how to “speak Bolshevik”: It was just a language that you needed to use in order to get by in society. If you didn’t talk the way the regime wanted you to talk, then you might have problems, or lose your job, or your kids would not get into university. It was a way of getting along. Communist Poland was similar, at least in the early years. When I was writing a book about the Sovietization of Eastern Europe after World War II, I met a lot of people who wanted to talk a lot about the war, when many of them had done really heroic things. But almost nobody wanted to talk about the decade afterwards, between 1945 and 1956. This was when you had the short period of terror, violence and Polish Stalinism. To stay safe, people felt the need to just go along with what others were saying, or stay out of politics, or use communist jargon without necessarily believing it. I don’t judge them for it, and I wouldn’t describe all of those people as collaborators. It’s easy to feel moral certainty in retrospect, because we know that communism ended. But if you were living in 1949, it might not have been clear to you that communism was going to end. In very repressive societies, maybe about 10% of people who are really evil – collaborators, torturers. Maybe 10% of people are really brave and who find ways to resist. And then around 80% of people have kids, they have parents, they have to have jobs and they’ve had to get through it somehow. Strange though it may sound, I’ve found that the work I did on that book is now very useful in explaining some of what’s going on in the United States today. There are plenty of members of the Republican Party in Congress who know perfectly well that Donald Trump says many things that aren’t true. But they avoid criticizing him because it’s inconvenient, because they would get in trouble, because someone would attack them on the internet. So actually you don’t even need mass terror to get people to conform. JC: Is Gen Z reinventing agency? AA: We’ll see. In any generation you can find groups of people who want agency. If you live in a society that’s unfair, for example where a tiny number of people have captured most of the wealth, then at a certain point people rebel. This is always easier for younger people, who have you have less to lose. The question now is how the internet will affect the relationships between citizens and the state, and how it will change organizations. The “Twitter revolutions” people spoke about as early as 2008-9, mass protests organized online, have often proved to be very superficial. Although you can easily join something just by clicking, the work of creating a real movement requires physical participation. Successful mass movements of the past, for example the Civil Rights movement in the United States, were built by people who had spent many years together. They had participated in non-violent workshops together. They practiced and prepared. Just using the you can get everybody to show up at a certain moment, but then when the protest is broken up, nothing happens. It’s also true that the repressive regimes have more recently learned how to use the internet to undermine leaders and movements. Most of all, they now understand how to make people cynical. The form of propaganda that most modern authoritarians use - and I think the Russians really pioneered this - deploys sneering cynicism. Instead of praising the rulers, the regime propagandists mock the opposition movement leadership for being supposedly corrupt or sexually degenerate, with the goal of undermining any kind of idealism. JC: MAGA grew on the internet? AA: MAGA is a real grassroots movement. They had symbols, red hats, they showed up at rallies. But you’re right that the cynicism, the sarcasm and the distrust that the movement embodies came originally from the internet, and this is different. Fifty years ago, most European political parties had a social base in real organizations, in trade unions for Social Democrats, in church groups for Christian Democrats. As people stopped going to church and as the trade unions became smaller, the social base of these parties disappeared. Now people who wouldn’t have known one another in the past meet on the internet and create new movements, many of which don’t last. JC: Is history ending? Going in stale circles? AA: History never ends. In truth, human beings want contradictory things at the same time: order and freedom, stability and change. These things are never resolved, and when a society swings too far in one direction, people always push it the other way. But each time that happens, the result is different. Certainly it is true that we are now in a period when old philosophers and ideas from the 1930s are undergoing a revival. Carl Schmitt, who was a philosopher who was very influential on the Nazis, is back as an influence on both the far left and the far right, once again inspiring people to think that all politics has to be existential, that all politics is about defining and defeating enemies. In the US, some are also bringing back dominionism, the idea that we need a Christian and not a secular state. It’s also true that we are living through a more fundamental shift. The old left-right divide, which was mostly about the size of the state, is much less important now. Instead, we are arguing about more fundamental things: what are our rights, what protects our freedom. Or how much power do we want to give small elites, versus how much power to give ordinary people. In America a small group of very wealthy people now control information, because they control the social media platforms and AI, which means they determine what people will read and learn. Finding a way to preserve preserve zones of autonomy and independent thinking, this is going to be the main task for the next generation. JC: What is the one book that a person interested in Central Europe should read? AA: You could read my book “Iron Curtain: the Crushing of Eastern Europe” which tells the story of how the Soviet Union imposed its culture on the region. Or read Tim Snyder’s history of the region, “The Reconstruction of Nations: Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus 1569-1999.” And everyone should read “The Captive Mind” by Czesław Miłosz, which describes exactly the phenomenon we were talking about: why do people collaborate? I joined Scott Galloway and the brilliant Fiona Hill in a discussion about the wars in Ukraine and Iran, the future of global power, and what these conflicts reveal about America's role in the world. Scott told us that this was the 400th edition of his podcast, which is quite a number: My friend Francesco Chiamulera runs a brilliant series of literary events, Una Colline di Libri, A Hill of Books, in the Prosecco Hills, a region of vineyards and elegant hill towns in the Veneto, north of Venice. We did an event in Vittorio Veneto and also drove and biked around the countryside. Buy Autocracy Inc Buy Iron Curtain Open Letters, from Anne Applebaum is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
2026 Men's College World Series: Storylines, predictions and players to watch
Our experts break down top storylines, players and predictions for this year's MCWS.
Former CFTC Chair Gary Gensler on regulating sports betting: Let the states do it
Gary Gensler, former CFTC chairman under President Obama and former SEC chairman under President Biden, joins 'Squawk Box' to discuss why he's filing an amicus brief arguing Congress did not intent to make the CFTC the nationwide regulator of sports betting when it passed the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, regulating sports betting, his thoughts on prediction markets, insider trading concerns, and more.
United States World Cup 2026 Odds, Predictions & Best Bets
The World Cup 2026 is on home soil, the squad is named, and the nation is watching — but can the United States turn home advantage into a genuine deep run, and are the outright odds worth a punt?…...
2026 World Cup: Predictions, rankings, team-by-team schedules, rosters and everything else you need to know before kickoff
Nvidia Buys Kumo AI To Bring AI Predictions To Business Data
Nvidia's reported $400 million acquisition of Kumo AI is a bet that the next wave of enterprise AI value will come from business data, not just documents and code.
World Cup 2026 predictions: Who gets the Golden Ball amd Golden Boot, biggest disappointments, championship picks and more
No injuries, no props: CFTC proposes prediction market rules
Prediction markets could soon be barred from offering certain types of sports-related event contracts, including those involving officiating outcomes or player injuries.
Trump administration proposes new rules on prediction markets that would still allow most sports activity
The Trump administration on Wednesday proposed a set of new federal regulations for prediction markets that appear to largely leave the booming industry intact.
Feds move to formally allow sports "trading" on prediction markets
The CFTC moved Wednesday to formalize rules allowing prediction markets to offer the equivalent of sports betting nationwide.
2026 World Cup viewer's guide: Format, new rules, predictions, how to watch and everything you need to know before kickoff
Yankees news: Good news on Austin Wells
Austin Wells receives promising MRI results; an All-Star prediction; Yesavage starting Friday for Jays
Kalshi wants to know where you work
The prediction market has added several new guardrails to weed out insider trading and bad actors.
Micah Parsons' Caleb Williams prediction should worry Packers fans
Micah Parsons singled out Caleb Williams when asked who could become the NFL's best player, adding more momentum to the Bears quarterback's rise.
Coaches, ADs 'disgusted,' 'stunned' with Brendan Sorsby ruling
A judge's decision to rule Texas Tech's Brendan Sorsby eligible Monday drew the ire of college coaches and athletic directors, with reactions ranging from doomsday predictions to informal talk about Big 12 schools attempting to not play the Red Raiders.
We can create the future of science right now
Paul Litvak is the founder and Executive Director of the Robyn Dawes Institute and a Visiting Scholar at UC Berkeley. He has a PhD in Behavioral Decision Research from Carnegie Mellon where he studied emotions and the sunk cost bias. Over 15 years in industry, he solved a wide range of challenging technical problems. At Meta he created models optimizing the ad review process. At Google he ran experiments to measure social influence. At Airbnb, he was a product manager leading machine learning teams optimizing search ranking and price suggestions. He also co-founded and led product at Rhythmic Health, a venture-backed biosensing startup, creating an accurate low cost system using a color changing strip and a smart phone to measure salivary lactate. The bottleneck At this point, it is uncontroversial to say that science needs to stop using the PDF article as the unit of knowledge and currency. The unbearable slowness of scientific publishing, the profit motive and margins: I’m not saying anything new. The PDF also sucks because it’s hard to extract structured information, which makes it hard to do evidence synthesis. As a result, we do much less evidence synthesis than is needed. And evidence synthesis ultimately undergirds most policy and medical decision-making. I can see second-by-second real-time odds for any sporting or newsworthy event, but a school board can’t see the best evidence on whether their 8th graders should be taught algebra. As a society, we don’t treat this as an important problem. Again, not controversial. Not only is the problem well understood, but the solution has already been laid out. What we need is AI-assisted living evidence synthesis - (1) an open knowledge graph of atomic claims, (2) claims linked to evidence, (3) assessment and synthesis of each piece of evidence, and (4) continuous updating with new data. What few realize (yet) is that the technical capacity to build this vision for a significant portion of science already exists. Not only that, scientists and startup teams are already building many of these components. I know this because I’ve been surveying the space and talking to many of the builders. There are some missing pieces: for example, evaluations of how well some of the components work. But at this point, most of what’s missing is a fully end-to-end working integration of all of these parts. In the rest of this essay, I’m going to lay out all the parts of a working living evidence layer for science and who is working on them, and propose concrete next steps for building this system. What’s now possible The diagram above outlines the components of a living evidence synthesis platform, including some of the teams working on each component1. Scientific PDFs are processed into claims with associated evidence. The evidence is subjected to a forensic audit, methodological evaluation and robustness and reproducibility checks. Finally it’s given a weight in a continuously updating synthesis. What follows is a description and status of each component and a few of the teams working on them. Document understanding The first thing you need to be able to do is turn an article into structured data. Mostly that means parsing PDFs. There are often multicolumn layouts that confuse non-specialized PDF to text processing libraries. For scientific papers, there is the added complexity of parsing formulas and tables and figures. This is a really hot area - there are startups offering APIs, and it seems like a new open source package gets posted to Github every few weeks. What follows isn’t exhaustive. A package called GROBID was the state of the art for a while, they didn’t update their package for nearly two years until very recently. In the meantime reducto.ai released an AI powered PDF extraction API, PaddleOCR became popular, IBM released a model called Docling, and both Mistral and Gemini created models and libraries. I also know of at least one other well-funded psychology research group working on a paper parser. By contrast, there are few open evals in this space, with no extensive evals for complex table comprehension in particular. Nonetheless, I’m confident this will be a solved problem soon, given the combination of LLM advances and developer interest. Hypothesis level extraction There has been increasing interest in comprehending the extracted text of papers and linking information to evidence for each hypothesis. A lot of work has already been done. Trialstreamer (Marshall et al. 2020) and RobotReviewer LIVE (Marshall et al. 2023) demonstrated automated extraction of trial population, intervention, and outcome at scale on clinical RCTs. PaperQA2 (Skarlinski et al. 2024) and Ai2 ScholarQA (2024) extended this to retrieval-augmented question answering with citation grounding. Elicit, Consensus, and SciSpace operationalized claim-level extraction for end users. OpenEval (Booeshaghi et al. 2026) is the most recent and most ambitious: 1.96 million atomic claims extracted from 16,087 eLife manuscripts using Claude Sonnet 4.5, grouped into ~299,000 results, with LLM evaluations showing 81% agreement with human peer review on a 2,487-paper subset. None of these solutions link claims to test-statistics, as you would need to evaluate randomized controlled trials. This is why I built the evidence.guide API - to extract hypotheses and associated test statistics from behavioral science papers. The best public eval of this kind of extraction I’m aware of comes from the recent SCORE project - they had humans code thousands of psychology papers to extract their claims by hand. It would be extremely helpful to the world if all scientific PDFs were available as structured open data. I’ve been working to make this happen, both directly at Berkeley and through coordination with large entities I can’t yet speak of; as hard as it is to do, I think it’s possible2. Forensic audit A lot of work has been done on forensic audit, but some gaps remain. Of course, for biology papers that rely on images for evidence, there are a variety of tools (notably Proofig and ImageTwin) to spot anomalies. These are still well short of what sleuths like Elizabeth Bik can do on her own, but these tools are constant companions among fraud analysts. There’s someone working on auditing Excel files for anomalies, and a number of teams are automating numerical checks like GRIM and SPRITE, including Scrutiny project, the INSPECT-SR team as well as statcheck. The regcheck team is building a way to use AI to compare preregistrations to analyses in papers, to ensure there aren’t significant deviations. Nonetheless, there are many other kinds of anomalies to screen for, both public and less publicly known. And there are no formal evals for anomaly detection that I’m aware of. Still, there’s a lot to draw from in this space and I’m pretty certain we will be able to scan papers for most kinds of obvious anomalies in the near future. Methodological review This area has been white hot, though I fear for many of the startups in this space, because this capability may become commoditized. There are at least six different AI peer review companies, including Refine.ink, Reviewer3, ReviewerZero.ai, Q.E.D. Science, Paper Wizard, and Isitcredible. Coarse (a pun on refine) was also recently created as an open source alternative. These systems provide qualitative feedback on the content of papers, spotting methodological weaknesses and mathematical errors. They seem to work pretty well, and many academics report bitterly that they exceed the average quality of typical peer reviewers. But there are few evals here either. What evals exist so far involve using LLM-as-judge (circularity problems abound) or comparing against human reviews of questionable quality. What you’d ideally want is an eval that measures capturing known errors in papers3. Reproducibility and robustness Another active area has been using AI agents to automate computational reproducibility4 and robustness5 checks in papers that report numerical results. For more recent papers where data and code are available, AI agents can see whether they can re-run the analyses and produce the numbers reported in the published paper. In addition to a handful of individual academics who have been experimenting using Claude Code for this, the Institute for Replication is a leading group working on building an end to end system. The evals related to this problem are the most mature, with CORE-Bench (Siegel, Kapoor, Narayanan 2024) and PaperBench (OpenAI 2025) available to benchmark agents on this task. There is also work on getting AI agents to test alternative ways of analyzing the data to ensure the results are robust to small analytic design choices. Synthesis This is the most underdeveloped area where significant investment is required. Although some automated evidence synthesis systems exist — for example, otto-sr is building an AI agent to write systematic reviews — none of these incorporate the full range of paper level signals to weight evidence appropriately. Nor is there anything like an eval or a gold standard for a good systematic review. Arguably Cochrane reviews are the closest we have to gold standard human systematic reviews, though I’ve heard academics in the know complain about their uneven quality. A key question for a synthesis platform is how to weight anomalies and methodological issues in assessing the quality of a piece of evidence. This is an unsolved problem and one I’m very keen to work on. Continuous updating There are many pieces of basic infrastructure available for monitoring for new research and initiating updates. OpenAlex is the current open citation graph. Retraction Watch integrated into Crossref in October 2023. Scite tracks how citations support, contrast, or mention prior claims. The Living Evidence Network demonstrated continuous-update workflows in clinical guidelines. Engineering this is a relatively straightforward task. When you look over this technical architecture and all the progress being made, it’s hard not to be optimistic that a living guide to scientific evidence will be built. The stakeholders are ready The social infrastructure for this is starting to coalesce — it’s not just a pie in the sky academic exercise to imagine this coming into existence. Institutions like the Center for Open Science, the Institute for Replication, the INSPECT-SR, the Living Evidence Network and more are all working on scaling work to improve research quality. Funders are also aligned. The Sloan Foundation has funded living evidence work through COS. Coefficient Giving supports the Institute for Replication and COS. The Astera Institute and the Institute for Progress have shown interest in this space. NIH has established an Office for Replication and Reproducibility. Although there are (very unfortunately) serious headwinds in science funding generally, there is an active group of funders interested in metascience. A brief word about what I’ve been doing at RDI. First, as a Visiting Scholar at Berkeley I’ve been actively figuring out how a non-profit and a public university can conduct and make public the results of large-scale academic article data mining. With some of the money I raised from donors, I commissioned a legal analysis of recent case law and publisher text data mining (TDM) agreements in order to understand whether a massive open data mining of academic articles is possible (with caveats, it is). I’ve also been working to bring together stakeholders in this space, and identify gaps. I’ve also been doing some software development in this space, with more to come. A pilot proposal The assumption undergirding all of this is that an AI, given all this information, would make the right judgment about a scientific claim with lots of conflicting evidence, weighing all the factors appropriately. That’s the hypothesis we need to test. Randomized control trial research is the best place to focus on first. RCTs are used to make many of the important decisions in society - from medical trials to public policy changes. And they use a relatively uniform set of inferential statistics with lots of known and available diagnostics. Behavioral science experiments, within the broader realm of RCTs, should be first used as a testbed whose results can be generalized. Because behavioral science is at the vanguard of open science practices, replications abound (there are thousands of them) to serve as ground truth training data. Key Hypothesis Therefore the pilot would test, in behavioral RCTs that have been replicated, whether the quality of evidence for a claim can be used to accurately predict whether that claim will replicate. Secondary Hypotheses Compared to claims that replicated, non-replicated claims demonstrate a greater share of forensic anomalies in their source literatures. Hypothesis level claim and statistic extraction is accurate enough to scale living evidence without onerous human review costs. Replication prediction is more accurate than prediction markets6 or journal prestige. If all the different quality signals we gather do accurately predict which studies will replicate, then we can use that model to score evidence to power the living evidence layer. Why this is informative regardless of outcome If the pilot succeeds, the architecture extends to medical RCTs (where Living Evidence already operates and integration is mostly about claim representation), then to slices of basic biology with stable replication structure. If it fails, the field learns which quality signals are load-bearing and which ones metascience has oversold. Either result is a contribution to knowing what the literature supports. Implications for funders Because this burgeoning ecosystem of builders already exists, a well-informed philanthropic or government funder could play a crucial catalyzing role in bringing this future about. They could play at least three roles: creating open structured datasets, publishing open benchmarks and incentivizing the solving of key technical challenges. First, open archives of papers that the government maintains, like PubMed, could be turned into structured data amenable to large scale metascience and claim aggregation. I know the US government already has an interest in doing this, though some key open questions remain unanswered. How do you determine the best models and systems for accurately extracting information from papers? How can you establish a robust way to allow researchers to flag errors and correct them? And finally, how do you create a legal regime in working with publishers to maximize the scope of available papers? For the latter, a university or a private philanthropy may be better positioned to make structured data publicly available under journal subscription terms or fair use. Philanthropists or government funders could also coordinate to create or commission benchmarks that evaluate whether important problems have been solved. For example, an open benchmark for claim extraction from a range of different scientific article types would be extremely helpful. Ensuring the underlying data are accurate is vital for creating these evaluations. I’ve discussed opportunistically using various human-created datasets for this purpose, but a consistent problem is that errors in human data make it difficult for them to serve as a gold standard. Finally, with structured data and benchmarks available, the government or private philanthropy could use them to incentivize groups to develop machine learning systems that meet these benchmarks. Prizes are one potentially valuable tool for this. For example, you could establish a prize for a system that accurately updates a living meta-analysis for a small set of claims. Prizes are particularly useful as signals of problem importance, and can help create vibrant ecosystems of public and private research—see, for example the role the government played in kickstarting the current work on nuclear fusion. Conclusion The drawbacks of the current scientific publishing system are known. Scientists agree, metascientists agree, philanthropists agree: the published PDF plus citation graph isn’t the right substrate for maintaining a representation of the evidence base in science. The pieces needed to build the alternative either already exist or are rapidly taking shape. The community is forming around exactly this problem, with concrete partnerships and shared infrastructure. A pilot should start on behavioral science RCTs because that’s the slice of empirical science most amenable to legibility, where replication ground truth is richest, and where the failure modes are best documented. What’s been missing is the galvanizing mission to assemble these pieces into something that works. That’s what I’m proposing to build. *** 1 I have a broader field map that I’ll release publicly soon. This is me, building in public! 2 If this is something that you are excited about, please reach out and talk to me. 3 More on this very soon too! 4 This tests whether, given the code and the data, you can get the same statistics as reported in the published paper. 5 This tests whether the results are the same as a paper’s given alternative analytical decisions in conducting the analysis (like outlier omission). Closely related is the idea of a “multiverse” where you come up with many different ways of answering the same underlying research question with the same data, and test whether the results hold in all those alternative methods. There’s been work on the latter as well. 6 Some of the replications, e.g. those from the SCORE project, had paired the experiments with forecasts from prediction markets. So we get to look at this for free.
The Odds: Trump’s hometown
CNN News Central’s John Berman and Chief Data Analyst Harry Enten explore what the latest polling and prediction markets say about the President’s popularity in his hometown of New York City.
FIFA World Cup 2026 bold predictions
The 2026 FIFA World Cup starts on Thursday. Running from June 11th to July 19th, the much-anticipated tournament will bring exciting matches in the world’s sport. 48 teams, through 104 fixtures, will give their all to achieve world glory. Argentina…
Fantasy Football Sleepers, Busts & Predictions: 2026 Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Have the recent Buccaneers been a success? Over the last four years, the team has three division titles, and in the fourth, it tied for the division lead and lost out on a tiebreaker. On the other hand, that amounts…
Bengals News (6/8): More positive predictions for Cincinnati
Some pundits are really buying into the Bengals plan.
Opinion - NASA’s moon base might be nothing like science fiction’s predictions
NASA officials expressed several reasons for making the moon base, in effect, a small city.
Kansas City Chiefs: ESPN Expert Drops Major Patrick Mahomes Prediction
Patrick Mahomes and the Kansas City Chiefs are once again entering a season with championship expectations, but one prediction has elevated the conversation surrounding the star quarterback even further. An NFL analyst recently projected that Mahomes will capture the third Most Valuable Player award of his career during the 2026 season, a forecast that underscores […] The post Kansas City Chiefs: ESPN Expert Drops Major Patrick Mahomes Prediction appeared first on Gridiron Heroics.
Alabama, Kalen DeBoer Slapped With Concerning 2026 Prediction
The Alabama Crimson Tide and head coach Kalen DeBoer have been handed a concerning prediction.
How prediction markets could forecast the future of science
Online prediction markets are taking bets on everything from climate change to quantum computing. But researchers question their accuracy
How The 2026 World Cup Favourites Are Rated
International football has become harder to separate from the betting markets surrounding it. Predictions for the 2026 World Cup have been shifting long before the tournament itself, with qualificatio...
CFB analyst provides intriguing prediction for Texas A&M's 2026 season
Popular X account CFB Home predicts Texas A&M to finish 10-2 in 2026, with both losses coming at the end of the year.
Scientists warn Trump plan to axe US ocean monitoring system will leave world ‘flying blind’
Experts say dismantling the ocean observation system will ‘severely degrade’ the accuracy of weather predictions
NFL analyst makes bold prediction for Chargers' Tre Harris
Chargers wide receiver Tre' Harris could play a big role in 2026. An NFL analyst certainly believes he will.
Google's new Gemma 4 open AI model is sized for your laptop
Gemma 4 12B uses a new encoding scheme and token prediction to punch above its weight.
Why Kalshi Wants Businesses To Bet on the Knicks, Too
A Manhattan bar is using Kalshi as an insurance policy for a free-drinks promotion. This is the future prediction markets want.
George Santos reported to DOJ over suspicious Kalshi trades, AP source says
The prediction marketplace Kalshi detected trades made by Santos ahead of Trump's Feb. 24 speech
George Santos reported to DOJ over suspicious Kalshi trades, AP source says
The prediction marketplace Kalshi detected trades made by Santos ahead of Trump's Feb. 24 speech
2026 Memorial Tournament odds, picks: Surprising predictions by golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the Memorial Tournament 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA picks this week
George Santos faces DOJ, CFTC probes over Kalshi trades
George Santos is under investigation by the DOJ and CFTC for alleged insider trading on Kalshi, a prediction market platform.
How Science Works
The 2nd Weather and Climate Livestream is now underway. It is organized by a group of early-career researchers concerned about declining funding for the field and eager to demonstrate how weather and climate research makes a difference in our lives. Last year’s event was a great success, drawing terrific press coverage including a piece in the NY Times. This year features a strong lineup of talks aimed at a general audience — I highly recommend tuning in. Share I gave a talk yesterday about How Science Works in Three Steps. You can see the short presentation here (I’ve appended a transcript below): And please tune into the livestream here. It runs through tomorrow at 6 pm ET. Thanks for reading The Climate Brink! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe Cleaned up transcript: Thank you, and thanks to everyone tuning in. I want to talk about something I think a lot of people don’t really understand: how science actually works. Arguments over any scientific topic — climate change, vaccines, you name it — revolve around competing claims. For climate change, the claims are: Is the Earth warming? Are humans to blame? What will the impacts be? Over the last 150 years, the scientific community has developed a remarkably robust method for sorting out which claims are true and which aren’t. That method is what I want to walk through. So how does science generate knowledge? If you ask a high schooler, they’ll give you the version they learned in ninth grade: an individual scientist forms a hypothesis, runs an experiment, and draws a conclusion. That’s more or less what happens at the individual level, though in practice it’s more iterative — you design, test, and refine all at once, landing on a slightly different idea each time until you reach a conclusion about whatever hypothesis you’ve ended up with. But this isn’t science. It’s only step one. Any individual scientist can make mistakes — scientists are human. Maybe there’s a bug in the code, maybe there’s an error in the experiment. Just because someone ran an experiment and reached a conclusion doesn’t mean it’s right, and scientists don’t treat a single result as settled truth. Step two is peer review, the first layer of quality control. The scientist writes up what they did and submits it to a journal, which sends the paper to other experts in the field. Those experts judge whether the methods are sound, whether it properly references prior work, and whether the conclusions actually follow from the data. Ask any scientist and they’ll tell you peer review is miserable — the comments come back brutal, often harsh, and you have to revise and resubmit, sometimes multiple times, before an editor finally accepts the paper. Peer review catches an immense amount of bad science, but it can’t catch all of it. Reviewers get sloppy or overworked, they miss obvious mistakes, and they can’t catch hidden errors — a bug in the code, a misread instrument. So a peer-reviewed paper making it into a journal doesn’t mean the paper is right. Nobody treats a single paper as the final word. That’s where step three comes in: the crucible of science. Important results get retested by the broader community. If you publish something interesting, it gets dissected. Sometimes people try to reproduce your work directly but more often they test its implications. If someone claims X is true, and that implies that Y is also true, then scientists will go check Y. If a claim survives this gauntlet long enough, it becomes accepted. That’s how we generate knowledge. Let me give an example: the ozone hole. In 1985 — and I doubt many people watching were around then, but I remember it well — Joe Farman and his colleagues published observations from Antarctica showing that a huge chunk of ozone was disappearing every year. This was shocking because most atmospheric chemists had expected ozone loss to occur at mid-latitudes and high altitudes, not over the South Pole. When scientists see something they don’t understand, they rush to explain it, and several competing hypotheses quickly appeared in the peer-reviewed literature. One pointed to chlorine chemistry from chlorofluorocarbons. A second blamed nitrogen chemistry, possibly driven by solar proton events — meaning the sun was responsible. A third argued it wasn’t chemistry at all but dynamics: winds were carrying naturally low-ozone air from the lower atmosphere up into the stratosphere. Then the community went to work testing which theory could survive the crucible. Aircraft flew into the ozone hole and found no nitrogen, ruling out the nitrogen theory. Measurements showed the air in the polar vortex was descending, not rising — which would bring high-ozone air down, eliminating the dynamics theory. Meanwhile, those same flights measured enormous amounts of chlorine, strongly correlated with exactly the regions where ozone was being destroyed. That became known as the “smoking gun” paper, and it established that chlorine chemistry was the cause. Through this process, a consensus emerged. And it’s worth being clear that this consensus is organic. There’s no vote, no poll, no meeting where it gets decided. Scientists go to conferences, talk to one another, and independently arrived at the same answer. It’s the ultimate free market of ideas. After the consensus was established, the peer-reviewed literature doesn’t even mention the rival theories — it simply takes chlorine chemistry as given. That’s what a consensus looks like. It doesn’t mean every single scientist agrees, but it does mean there’s no longer any legitimate debate. So where can you see what scientists actually think? It’s all in the peer-reviewed literature, which contains the entire historical record of the argument: the discovery, the competing theories, the debate, the testing, and finally the community coalescing around one answer. But there’s a lot of room for misrepresentation. You can dig up an old paper claiming the ozone hole was caused by dynamics and wave it around as if there still was a debate about the cause of the ozone hole — without mentioning that the idea was disproven long ago and that even its own authors no longer believe it. There’s a bigger problem, though: the peer-reviewed literature is written in a language I call “nerd.” It’s extremely hard to read — honestly, some of it is hard for me to follow. It takes graduate students years to work through the literature in a single field, so we can’t expect policymakers or ordinary people to do it. This is where scientific assessments come in. The most famous is the IPCC — the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The job of an assessment is to read and summarize the peer-reviewed literature, synthesizing what’s settled, what’s been disproven, and what remains genuinely debated. To ensure the assessments accurately summarize the peer-reviewed literature, assessments are written by large teams, which are far less prone to bias than individuals and which dilute the influence of any one scientist with an axe to grind. The teams are deliberately assembled to avoid stacking the deck, and the reports themselves go through multiple rounds of peer review. That rigorous process is exactly why you can trust them and why people consider the IPCC to be the gold standard of what we know about the climate system. An assessment produced through a different process may well not be credible. You can even watch the consensus evolve across assessments. Take the attribution of warming. The 1990 IPCC report said the observed warming was broadly consistent with model predictions but also comparable to natural variability — in other words, we don’t know whether humans are responsible. By 1995, it concluded that the balance of evidence suggested a discernible human influence — a sentence only a committee could write, and one that barely commits to anything. By 2001, most of the warming over the previous 50 years was judged “likely” due to greenhouse gases; by 2007, “very likely”; by 2013, “extremely likely.” The 2023 report says essentially the same as 2013 — there’s not much stronger language available. So, to wrap up: science is our ultimate tool for deciphering the universe — the most successful method we’ve ever developed for determining what’s true and what isn’t. Our understanding is written into the peer-reviewed literature, so if you want to know what scientists think, that’s where to look. And for those of us who don’t speak nerd, scientific assessments are the Rosetta Stone — they translate nerd into English. Let me open the floor to questions. Thank you.
Sports has become the antidote for AI, says Monumental Sports CEO Ted Leonsis
Ted Leonsis, Monumental Sports & Entertainment founder, chairman and CEO, joins 'Squawk Box' to discuss the 2026 NBA Finals, his thoughts on prediction markets, impact of AI on sports, state of ticket prices, and more.
Watch CNBC's full interview with Monumental Sports & Entertainment CEO Ted Leonsis
Ted Leonsis, Monumental Sports & Entertainment founder, chairman and CEO, joins 'Squawk Box' to discuss the 2026 NBA Finals, his thoughts on prediction markets, impact of AI on sports, state of ticket prices, and more.
Conor Orr’s 100 Bold Predictions for the 2026 NFL Season
From the Super Bowl champion to the performance of new coaches and more: envisioning award winners, breakout candidates and two Hollywood movies.
Restrictions on prediction market bets by US troops part of draft defense bill
Members of the US military may soon be barred from using prediction markets to bet on global events if a draft defense policy bill passes Congress and becomes law. The proposal comes after a high-profile case where a US special forces soldier is accused of using classified information to place bets tied to the capture of Nicolás Maduro.
France rated second favourites for World Cup by Opta supercomputer
France have been identified as the second favourites to win the 2026 FIFA World Cup according to predictions generated by Opta’s supercomputer ahead of the tournament.With just over a week remaining...
Prediction: Venice (Fla.) falls in Open Division playoff
The 2026 high school football season will be getting underway in less than two months with official practices, which means it’s officially preview season. Rivals is breaking down the nation’s top teams from coast-to-coast, and today we make our way back down south to the Sunshine State to check on the 4-time state champion Venice Indians […]
NFL insider's latest prediction could turn out to be huge news for Bryce Young when it comes to extension talks with the Panthers
ESPN's Adam Schefter believes the Houston Texans will get a deal done this summer with quarterback C.J. Stroud, which can set the foundation for Bryce Young's extension with the Carolina Panthers.
What’s Behind Tilman Fertitta’s $18 Billion Bet On Caesars Entertainment
Despite challenges from prediction markets, Ozempic and rising costs, the restaurateur owner of the Houston Rockets seeks to add 50 locations, and a mountain of debt, to his existing empire.
Alexander Volkanovski gives Ilia Topura vs. Justin Gaethje prediction
A lightweight championship unification bout between champion Ilia Topuria and interim titleholder Justin Gaethje headlines the UFC Freedom 250 fight card on June 14 at the White House. It will be Topuria's first title defense. Topuria is a heavy betting favorite two weeks out from the event, but ...
Chicago Bears Over/Under Player Milestone Predictions (Part 2)
Our guy @GOOCH1701 is back with some Bears over/under statistical predictions.
FIFA World Cup 2026 odds: Futures picks, predictions, soccer best bets from proven expert
SportsLine's Martin Green reveals his FIFA World Cup 2026 picks, overall champion, group winners and top props
2026 NBA Western Conference Finals odds, predictions: Spurs vs. Thunder Game 7 picks by expert who's 140-97
SportsLine's Mike Barner has revealed his San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder best bets for Game 7 of the WCF
PSG vs. Arsenal prediction, time, odds: 2026 UEFA Champions League final picks, best bets from top expert
SportsLine soccer expert Martin Green reveals his best bets for Saturday's UEFA Champions League final featuring PSG vs. Arsenal
Thunder vs. Spurs Game 7 predictions, odds: Expert picks with NBA Finals berth on the line
It's win or go home for the Thunder and Spurs on Saturday night as the Western Conference Finals wrap up with Game 7
New York tries to rein in prediction markets
In a gaming-friendly state, prediction markets have not been welcome.
Gamification and memes lure young people to sports wagering apps, prediction markets
The companies often use memes to advertise their platforms, then keep users hooked with what they market as low-stakes, casual opportunities to make an easy buck.
Trump vows to protect the family businesses: crypto and prediction markets
In a Truth Social post, the president said no one should be allowed to regulate his new cash cows.
Ben Roethlisberger makes bold Super Bowl prediction for Steelers
Ben Roethlisberger has predicted what the Pittsburgh Steelers’ 2026 season could look like, and it may involve competing for a Super Bowl.
Exclusive: Kalshi launches an "S&P 500 for politics"
"The S&P 500 for politics" is coming to Kalshi, the prediction market says.
Ireland vs Qatar: How to Watch, Prediction, Odds, Friendly Preview
Republic of Ireland faces Qatar in an international friendly. Here’s how to watch, team form, betting odds and more.
American Gaming Association CEO on prediction markets: The vast majority of their business is sports betting
Bill Miller, American Gaming Association president and CEO, joins 'Squawk Box' to discuss his thoughts on the CFTC's plan to regulate prediction markets, sports gambling vs. prediction markets, news of Fertitta Entertainment buying Caesars Entertainment, and more.
VaynerMedia CEO Gary Vaynerchuk on Knicks mania, prediction markets and state of media business
Gary Vaynerchuk, VaynerMedia CEO and VaynerX chairman, joins 'Squawk Box' to discuss the New York Knicks' run to the NBA Finals, his thoughts on prediction markets, NBC rights deal with the NBA, state of the media business, and more.
Gamification and memes lure young people to sports wagering apps, prediction markets
When Rory McIlroy won the Masters for the second year in a row, Kalshi shared a photo of him on Instagram with the words, “Wait he’s goated.” When a video of NBA player Damian Lillard recovering from an injury circulated online, Kalshi’s main competitor Polymarket posted, “The league is cooked.”
Prediction markets and sports wagering apps draw young users with gamification and memes
Some sports wagering platforms, as well as popular prediction markets Kalshi and Polymarket, are touting their availability to users starting at 18 despite most U.S. states restricting gambling to 21 and older.
Is The Market Mispricing Flutter Entertainment On FanDuel Concerns?
Flutter Entertainment faces headwinds from prediction markets and declining US sports betting revenues. Learn why FLUT stock is a buy.
Tennessee attorney general says Kalshi is running sports betting under another name
Tennessee’s legal fight against prediction market platform Kalshi is now heading to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, setting up for a growing national battle over whether sports event contracts …
Thunder vs. Spurs predictions: Experts re-pick Western Conference Finals based on everything we know now
The West Finals have turned into a best-of-three series... so who will move on to face the Knicks in the NBA Finals?
Large Hadron Collider detects strange particle behavior that could rewrite physics
Scientists working at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider may be seeing the strongest hints yet of physics beyond the Standard Model — the decades-old theory that explains the fundamental particles and forces of the universe. By studying incredibly rare particle transformations called “penguin decays,” researchers found behavior that doesn’t fully match theoretical predictions, raising the possibility that unknown particles or forces are influencing the results.
NFL Player News
Find all the latest fantasy football news, reports, transactions, videos, predictions, and more right here on NBC Sports - Rotoworld.
2026 Charles Schwab Challenge odds, picks: Surprising predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the Charles Schwab Challenge 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA best bets
Way-too-early Steelers award predictions for 2026
Way too early predictions for the Steelers’ award winners.
Sorry, Apple: Samsung’s Fainting Detection Is a Game Changer
I might just have to consign my Apple Watch to the great tech junkyard in the sky.
Premier League predictions: How accurate were BBC Sport pundits?
Last summer, 33 BBC pundits - plus AI and Opta's 'supercomputer' were asked to pick which teams would finish in the Premier League's top four, and in which order. How did they get on?
2026 Indianapolis 500 odds, predictions, time, Indy 500 starting grid: Model gives surprising picks
Best bets for the Indianapolis 500 on Sunday from Indianapolis Motor Speedway with Alex Palou on the pole
2026 NBA Eastern Conference Finals odds, predictions: Knicks vs. Cavaliers Game 3 picks by expert who's 135-95
SportsLine's Mike Barner has revealed his New York Knicks vs. Cleveland Cavaliers best bets for Game 3 of the ECF
NBA player prop picks, odds: Three best 2026 NBA Playoffs prop bets for Knicks vs. Cavaliers, Game 3
SportsLine's model and team of experts have revealed top NBA props picks and NBA predictions for the NBA Playoffs on Saturday
Making our initial projections on the Jaguars 53-man roster
The Jaguars are in the thick of their offseason program, and it’s time for our pre-OTAs 53-man roster projection. News4JAX sports reporters Jamal St. Cyr and Justin Barney make their first roster predictions of the year.
2026 Indianapolis 500 odds, predictions, time, date, Indy 500 starting grid: Model gives surprising picks
Best bets for the Indianapolis 500 on Sunday from Indianapolis Motor Speedway with Alex Palou on the pole
Analyst makes bold prediction regarding Baker Mayfield in 2026
Bleacher Report believes Baker Mayfield could be the key to a deep Buccaneers playoff run in 2026.
Thunder vs. Spurs odds, prediction: 2026 NBA Western Conference finals picks, Game 3 best bets by proven model
SportsLine's proven model has revealed its OKC Thunder vs. San Antonio Spurs NBA playoff best bets for Game 3 of the WCF
Thunder vs. Spurs odds, prediction: 2026 NBA Western Conference finals picks, Game 3 best bets by proven model
SportsLine's proven model has revealed its OKC Thunder vs. San Antonio Spurs NBA playoff best bets for Game 3 of the WCF
Sen Blackburn says sports betting hearing likely first of ‘several’ as Congress weighs federal action
Sen. Blackburn says Congress must determine where federal regulation is needed as sports betting and prediction markets rapidly expand in the U.S.
Senate panel hears testimony on online sports betting, prediction markets
Senate lawmakers grilled sports betting industry officials during a hearing focused on recent cheating scandals, companies' marketing tactics and regulatory battles.
How AI can help soil scientists secure a vital global resource
AI tools can accelerate soil science by speeding up early-stage work, improving predictions to support decisions on land-use, carbon, and climate adaptation, handling complex data, and freeing scientists to focus on questions that require expert judgment.
Congress increases scrutiny into sports betting, prediction markets
Congress is intensifying its scrutiny of sports gambling and prediction markets amid a wave of scandals in professional and collegiate sports that have raised c
Industry Experts Testify on Rise of Sports Betting & Prediction Markets
A Senate Commerce subcommittee holds a hearing on the expansion of sports betting and prediction markets.
2026 CJ Cup Byron Nelson odds, picks: Surprising predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the CJ Cup Byron Nelson 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA best bets
2026 Chicago Bears Schedule: FOX Sports Win-Loss predictions & season assement
Here is a full assessment of the Bears' full regular-season slate, and how FOX Sports thinks they'll do in 2026.
Prediction markets face a ban in one state, but the fight's not over
The CFTC is suing Minnesota and Gov. Tim Walz over a ban on prediction markets like Polymarket and Kalshi, set to take effect in August.
2026 CJ Cup Byron Nelson odds, picks: Surprising predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the CJ Cup Byron Nelson 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA best bets