If you ask one scientist to guess how many jelly beans are in a jar, unless they have worked specifically on that problem before, their guess won't be very accurate. But if you ask 500 random people, the mean of their responses will be quite accurate.
If you ask experts to predict the future of science and technology, will they be more accurate? SciCast, the government crowd-sourcing project, hopes so. They are asking for participants to make their predictions.
Though SciCast is based on the idea that collective wisdom is often more accurate at forecasting the outcome of events than that of one individual expert, they take it one step further, placing emphasis on relationships among questions and outcomes. “For example, forecasters might think success for a new kind of solar cell depends on the price of a key material. On SciCast, they can make the chances of success depend on the material prices.” explains Charles Twardy, research assistant professor, George Mason University and a SciCast Principal Investigator.
It's still controlled, which isn't ideal for the Science 2.0 community. Questions are chosen by the SciCast editorial team. And you can tell it has corporate influence. Topics are things like "whether or not Google will announce a new watch" or if Virgin Galactic will launch this year.
Unlike a survey, participants can change their forecast at any time in reaction to new information. Once the answer to a question is determined and made public, participants who answered correctly are rewarded and move up on the SciCast leaderboard. The more correct forecasts a participant makes, the more influence they’ll have in other forecasts.
Funding is provided by the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA)
- PHYSICAL SCIENCES
- EARTH SCIENCES
- LIFE SCIENCES
- SOCIAL SCIENCES
Subscribe to the newsletter
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
- Suggestion: The EM Drive Is Getting The Appropriate Level Of Attention From The Science Community
- Animal Sex Is Spicier Than We Thought
- Will Aspartame Critics Now Be Less Bitter?
- Why Alfred Hitchcock Grabs Your Attention
- Bang! Meet The Highest-Energy Hadron Collision Ever Imaged!
- Stardust For Sale
- Hormone Replacement Therapy 13 Years After The Women’s Health Initiative Study
- "With Tesla's home and office Powerwalls and the utility scale Powerpacks are fully built in Europe..."
- "2,000 contributors is not a crowd? ..."
- "Contrary to what you have written above, the SEC is not crowdsourced. See the Stanford Report:..."
- "Boob-ayCongratulations. You have made in into a select list of imbeciles: those who cannot read..."
- "Quite aside from the fact that your arithmetic is horrid, your chemistry is even worse. When a..."
- Excessive or inadequate? Confusion about medication is common
- Breast cancer in young women is rarer than media make it seem
- GE crops could save the environment, if Organic advocates let them
- No excuses to be against science now: Monsanto patent expires
- The Pendulum Swings: Prescribing Hormone Replacement Therapy 13 Years After the Women’s Health Initiative Study
- The search for new blood donors ends at the living – but why?
- How not to convince vaccine skeptics
- Even a little weekly physical activity goes a long way for seniors
- Low levels of endocrine disruptors in the environment may cause sex reversal in female frogs
- Get up for your heart health and move for your waistline
- As biodiversity declines on corn farms, pest problems grow