jdpressman commited on
Commit
698506c
1 Parent(s): 95a6cd2

Upload 4 files

Browse files
Files changed (5) hide show
  1. .gitattributes +1 -0
  2. README.md +141 -0
  3. test.json +0 -0
  4. train.json +3 -0
  5. val.json +0 -0
.gitattributes CHANGED
@@ -53,3 +53,4 @@ saved_model/**/* filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
53
  *.jpg filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
54
  *.jpeg filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
55
  *.webp filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
 
 
53
  *.jpg filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
54
  *.jpeg filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
55
  *.webp filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
56
+ train.json filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
README.md ADDED
@@ -0,0 +1,141 @@
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1
+ ---
2
+ language:
3
+ - en
4
+ ---
5
+
6
+ # Curated Manifold Markets Subset
7
+
8
+ There has been substantial interest in using large language models to answer
9
+ forecasting competition questions like the ones found on [Metaculus](https://www.metaculus.com/home/)
10
+ or [Manifold Markets](https://manifold.markets/). Metaculus's API is restricted
11
+ to teams that ask for permission to use it, but Manifold's API is openly available
12
+ under very liberal terms. This makes Manifold an appealing option for forecasting
13
+ model authors but for one problem: Manifold takes a libertarian approach to question
14
+ moderation and allows a lot of junk markets on the platform. While this makes it
15
+ an excellent incubator for new question formats and ideas, it can make training
16
+ models based on the resulting data a little tricky. This dataset is the top 10,000
17
+ resolved Manifold Markets questions in yes/no format as graded by the criteria
18
+ set out in the Limitations and Biases section below using an LLM evaluator. The
19
+ result is a much higher signal dataset than what you would get by pulling from
20
+ the API with minimal filtering.
21
+
22
+ ## Usage
23
+
24
+ ## Use Cases
25
+
26
+ - Baseline tuning strategy and validation set for answering forecasting questions
27
+ - Because forecasting questions are resolved yes/no they can be used to train weave
28
+ evaluator
29
+ - Good foundation to backtranslate from to make further datasets
30
+
31
+ ### Quickstart With HuggingFace Datasets
32
+
33
+ ```
34
+ import datasets
35
+ import datetime
36
+
37
+ def format_market_details(market):
38
+ question = market.get("question")
39
+ yes_probability = market.get("probability") * 100
40
+ no_probability = (1 - market.get("probability")) * 100
41
+ unique_bettor_count = market.get("uniqueBettorCount")
42
+ creator_name = market.get("creatorName")
43
+ created_time = datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(market.get("createdTime") / 1000).strftime("%Y-%m-%d at %H:%M UTC")
44
+ close_time = datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(market.get("closeTime") / 1000).strftime("%Y-%m-%d at %H:%M UTC")
45
+ text_description = market.get("textDescription")
46
+ resolution = market.get("resolution").title() + "."
47
+ out = ""
48
+ out += "Manifold Markets\n\n"
49
+ out += f"{question}\n"
50
+ out += f"YES {yes_probability:.2f}% NO {no_probability:.2f}% "
51
+ out += f"| {unique_bettor_count} Bettors\n"
52
+ out += f"Creator: {creator_name}\n"
53
+ out += f"Created: {created_time}\n"
54
+ out += f"Closes: {close_time}\n\n"
55
+ out += f"Description & Resolution Criteria: {text_description}\n\n"
56
+ out += f"Resolution: {resolution}"
57
+ return out
58
+
59
+ train = datasets.load_dataset("jdpressman/retro-weave-eval-jdp-v0.1")["train"]
60
+
61
+ for market_details in train:
62
+ print(format_market_details(market_details))
63
+ ```
64
+
65
+ ### Raw Quickstart
66
+
67
+ ```
68
+ import json
69
+ import datetime
70
+
71
+ def format_market_details(market):
72
+ question = market.get("question")
73
+ yes_probability = market.get("probability") * 100
74
+ no_probability = (1 - market.get("probability")) * 100
75
+ unique_bettor_count = market.get("uniqueBettorCount")
76
+ creator_name = market.get("creatorName")
77
+ created_time = datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(market.get("createdTime") / 1000).strftime("%Y-%m-%d at %H:%M UTC")
78
+ close_time = datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(market.get("closeTime") / 1000).strftime("%Y-%m-%d at %H:%M UTC")
79
+ text_description = market.get("textDescription")
80
+ resolution = market.get("resolution").title() + "."
81
+ out = ""
82
+ out += "Manifold Markets\n\n"
83
+ out += f"{question}\n"
84
+ out += f"YES {yes_probability:.2f}% NO {no_probability:.2f}% "
85
+ out += f"| {unique_bettor_count} Bettors\n"
86
+ out += f"Creator: {creator_name}\n"
87
+ out += f"Created: {created_time}\n"
88
+ out += f"Closes: {close_time}\n\n"
89
+ out += f"Description & Resolution Criteria: {text_description}\n\n"
90
+ out += f"Resolution: {resolution}"
91
+ return out
92
+
93
+ with open("train.json") as infile:
94
+ train = json.load(infile)
95
+
96
+ for market_details in train:
97
+ print(format_market_details(market_details))
98
+ ```
99
+
100
+ ## License
101
+
102
+ While no explicit license is given for this dataset, the Manifold Markets API page
103
+ informs the user they should "Feel free to use the API for any purpose you'd like."
104
+ and provides a site dump as a convenience. This implies that the Manifold team should
105
+ be okay with this dataset. If they're not they can contact me or HuggingFace to
106
+ have it taken down.
107
+
108
+ ## Data Structure
109
+
110
+ The data structure is a list of Manifold Market Details JSON objects as they're
111
+ given by the API. Here is a sample item:
112
+
113
+ > {"id": "JOLqUM7VZVWGyPMyjgOM", "creatorId": "fP5OQUWYt4MW17A2giGjMGsw1uu2", "creatorUsername": "LarsDoucet", "creatorName": "Lars Doucet", "createdTime": 1640805909009, "creatorAvatarUrl": "https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/AOh14Gh_23ZmfLBMGBR2crNwb0T8hBnPAap5nkWiSKuB=s96-c", "closeTime": 1672531200000, "question": "Will Joe Rogan interview a guest about Georgism in 2022?", "slug": "will-joe-rogan-interview-a-guest-ab", "url": "https://manifold.markets/LarsDoucet/will-joe-rogan-interview-a-guest-ab", "pool": {"NO": 103.73708237350644, "YES": 996.054209916458}, "probability": 0.031616466242030815, "p": 0.23866581093751968, "totalLiquidity": 184.67960075647989, "outcomeType": "BINARY", "mechanism": "cpmm-1", "volume": 4123.3286725950675, "volume24Hours": 0, "isResolved": true, "resolution": "NO", "resolutionTime": 1672976192735, "resolutionProbability": 0.03, "uniqueBettorCount": 50, "lastUpdatedTime": 1672976168074, "lastBetTime": 1672069861903, "lastCommentTime": 1672976161444, "description": "This market will resolve to \"Yes\" if, by December 31, 11:59:59 PM CT, Joseph James Rogan (aka \"Joe Rogan\"), host of the \"Joe Rogan Experience\" on Spotify, invites a guest onto that podcast who mentions any of these three words -- \"Georgism\", \"Geoism\", or \"Land Value Tax\" -- in a favorable context.\n#JoeRogan\n#Georgism\n#Economics\n#Podcast", "groupSlugs": ["georgism", "politics-default", "economics-default"], "textDescription": "This market will resolve to \"Yes\" if, by December 31, 11:59:59 PM CT, Joseph James Rogan (aka \"Joe Rogan\"), host of the \"Joe Rogan Experience\" on Spotify, invites a guest onto that podcast who mentions any of these three words -- \"Georgism\", \"Geoism\", or \"Land Value Tax\" -- in a favorable context.\n#JoeRogan\n#Georgism\n#Economics\n#Podcast"}
114
+
115
+ ## Biases and Limitations
116
+
117
+ The curation was performed by [SOLAR 10.7B base](https://huggingface.co/upstage/SOLAR-10.7B-v1.0)
118
+ using the [weave evaluator](https://github.com/JD-P/RetroInstruct/). Three rubrics
119
+ were used to filter out undesirable traits in a market:
120
+
121
+ - [The extent to which the market is about the personal life of a non-famous person](https://github.com/JD-P/RetroInstruct/blob/main/ManifoldSteelmanning/personal_rubric.txt)
122
+
123
+ - [Whether the market disregards the established rules and best practices for
124
+ drafting forecasting questions](https://github.com/JD-P/RetroInstruct/blob/main/ManifoldSteelmanning/resolvable_rubric.txt)
125
+
126
+ - [How meta, luck-based, or facetious a market is](https://github.com/JD-P/RetroInstruct/blob/main/ManifoldSteelmanning/degeneracy_rubric.txt)
127
+
128
+ Because all the questions in this rubric are answered with "yes" the evaluator
129
+ could be biased towards texts with "no" nature that make the evaluator answer
130
+ no more frequently. I did a quick spot check that the distribution of yes and
131
+ no resolutions on forecasting questions chosen didn't look very skewed, but it
132
+ might be a good idea to get the distribution of yes and no resolutions in the
133
+ dataset as a whole versus the subset I chose with weave evaluator. I will do
134
+ this later.
135
+
136
+ ## Planned Improvements
137
+
138
+ - Train models on this dataset to get a forecasting baseline
139
+ - Check distribution of yes and no questions in chosen subset vs. the distribution
140
+ on the full dataset
141
+ - Change weave evaluator questions to have a mix of yes and no answers desired
test.json ADDED
The diff for this file is too large to render. See raw diff
 
train.json ADDED
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
 
 
 
 
1
+ version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
2
+ oid sha256:39b88c5a0288814ca29b47478927f3cc5cb38b3637acca111989dff83a481170
3
+ size 30650493
val.json ADDED
The diff for this file is too large to render. See raw diff