https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winograd_schema_challenge
Resolves positivly if a computer program exists that can solve Winograd schemas as well as an educated, fluent-in-English human can.
Press releases making such a claim do not count; the system must be subjected to adversarial testing and succeed.
(Failures on sentences that a human would also consider ambiguous will not prevent this market from resolving positivly.)
/IsaacKing/will-ai-pass-the-winograd-schema-ch
/IsaacKing/will-ai-pass-the-winograd-schema-ch-1d7f8b4ad30e
/IsaacKing/will-ai-pass-the-winograd-schema-ch-35f9dca7fa7d
/IsaacKing/will-ai-pass-the-winograd-schema-ch-d574a4067e75
Update 2025-12-09 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Current performance benchmarks:
GPT-4: 87.5% accuracy
Human baseline: 94% accuracy
For reference, see the leaderboard mentioned in the creator's comment.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ648 | |
| 2 | Ṁ350 | |
| 3 | Ṁ89 | |
| 4 | Ṁ55 | |
| 5 | Ṁ44 |
People are also trading
That paper is from 2021, so it seems likely to me that a newer thinking model that's designed specifically for this sort of problem could break 94%. But I can't find any evidence of this actually having happened, and general-purpose thinking models do not seem capable of this. (Not to mention that developments this year don't count, this market ended at the end of 2024.) So I'm resolving NO.
@IsaacKing how would you figure out whether this market resolves YES? if you want to give some ai like claude newsonnet a few winograd schemas, it's clear it can solve them correctly