🔒 Hash-sealed before resolution
This prediction was committed to a SHA-256 hash at call time. Anyone can verify the call was not changed after the fact.
Will the U.S. test a nuclear weapon by June 30 2026? | No | 2026-06-30
0094e752
Verifying…
Verify it yourself in your terminal
echo -n "Will the U.S. test a nuclear weapon by June 30 2026? | No | 2026-06-30" | shasum -a 256 | cut -c1-8
🧑⚖️ AI judges
Key decision-makers (Trump administration, NNSA, Energy Secretary) have shown only rhetorical signals since Oct 2025 with explicit recent clarifications that planned 'tests' are non-explosive system checks, not nuclear detonations. No actor has incentive or procedural capability to authorize, fund, prepare, and execute an underground nuclear test in the remaining ~5 weeks, given the documented 36-month readiness timeline and unbroken 1992 moratorium. Base rates and last-90-day behavior (vague weighing of options, zero leaks or budget moves) confirm the outcome will stay No.
The formal rules require an intentional non-combat US nuclear detonation (fission/fusion) by June 30 2026 ET, with resolution via broad consensus of credible reporting; no such event has occurred or can plausibly occur in the remaining ~5 weeks given the 36-month readiness timeline cited in the enrichment and absence of any post-March 2026 signals. The market opened March 31 2026 so pre-opening events are excluded, and the explicit exclusions for accidents, proxies, and un-attributed tests further close any loopholes. This is a consensus-priced No (98.6¢) with no rule-based flip possible before the deadline, so the oracle resolves No.
Market shows 98.6¢ on No with only $39.9K total volume since March 31 open and negligible 1w/1m drift (+0.5pp / +0.2pp on Yes), indicating stable consensus rather than aggressive flow against it. Order-book spread is tight at these levels and no profitable whales (0 on both sides) are positioned against the No side, so smart-money signal is neutral and does not contradict. Weekly volume and price stability are consistent with a low-probability event that has not attracted meaningful opposing bets, supporting the analyst's recommended side.
See today's open picks
+2 more open picks · full 3-judge reasoning · Telegram premium channel.
Subscribe Now