delphi.question.published
Appended 15 Aug 2026, 15:53 UTC. Its place in the chain is fixed by the hash of the entry before it; what follows is whether that place is covered by a signature.
The entry
- sequence_
number - 14
- entry_
type delphi.question.published- entity_
type forecast_question - entity_
id 3b91df80-00fc-4a4b-b86e-3310edcb9332- logged_
at 2026-08-15T15:53:35.545163+00:00- previous_
hash 6b764ccd9c844dc58574bbb2041dbf42c976461f372665525b61a12c25fbd3cb- payload_
hash 528483aa41995262176aec559a2cf1d131198210525abfe7e9a8f2ebb47ff01f- entry_
hash 71e71a4de1b6e3e7659f2a0a25c13713a7edb1593ea09c4a48debdda3e533b7a
sourceGET /api/transparency/entries/{n}· one entry, as served to this reader· payload served
Payload
{
"slug": "will-the-brazilian-presidential-election-on-4-october-2026-be-decided-in-the-first-round",
"title": "Will the Brazilian presidential election on 4 October 2026 be decided in the first round?",
"origin": "EDITORIAL",
"timebase": {
"clock": "REAL_UTC"
},
"closes_at": "2026-10-04T12:00:00.000000Z",
"opened_at": "2026-08-15T15:53:35.541666Z",
"blind_mode": true,
"provenance": "PUBLIC_RECORD",
"description": "Brazil votes on 4 October 2026, with a run-off scheduled for 25 October if no candidate passes fifty per cent of valid votes. Most recent Brazilian presidential elections have gone to a second round.",
"question_id": "3b91df80-00fc-4a4b-b86e-3310edcb9332",
"resolution_criteria": "YES if one candidate receives more than 50 % of valid votes according to the Tribunal Superior Eleitoral and no run-off is scheduled.",
"expected_resolution_at": "2026-10-06T12:00:00.000000Z",
"canonical_source_policy": "Tribunal Superior Eleitoral official results at https://www.tse.jus.br.",
"resolution_rule_revision": 1
}Shown indented so it can be read. The hash is taken over the canonical form of the same object — keys sorted by code point, no insignificant whitespace, UTF-8 rather than escaped ASCII, timestamps RFC 3339 in UTC to microseconds, decimals as their plain string form. The check below re-encodes the object canonically before hashing it, which is why an indented display cannot make it pass or fail.
Verify it here
Recomputing the hashes in this browser… If this sentence stays, this browser has no Web Crypto and nothing here has been verified locally.
The proof, as served
- leaf_
index - 14
- tree_
size - 179
- leaf_
hash 8f9bcbf6de5fdbd831ede34fe63b975f6cf2c93874ecf3ea5f0a7c7e1de73a2e- audit_
path (8) 0: ce554503db862201f38fb0c2d4694589c5dadc98f63273ad11819322528878841: a36aea78db02232ee12df5b789addca1483bb74f3205613db20026b43787ae3a2: 1a0914f96fdb4c1960c81f86ace403a5c82466016e4d0b7866204e3591a43fd53: d7c05425bf6e3fadbed68d9552781d28647454d6dad43f268ec9145a2b4220fe4: b70d290aa081a17cfd1dd59b61f1a28551b4aa8df2915bb773f8eda8b60841055: b74c92a6356a40d4a8987db99772ead75d18bf349905054ba53bbc3401d9b2b96: 432b3bec17cc8d9bd118f5d2d11fc56d0578ec1940af60be2192f2f1b8d43dc67: 3f76b135a3f3ce5dc862e0e2e004c9eff2bbf99040ca47c64d64cec42062fd34- root_
hash b6268ac6224d3cfeaf4fdd2e07881a4bb21cf8ed320580fb2a683f4427a55006
The earliest published head that covers this entry
No published tree head covers this entry yet, so there is nothing signed to check it against. That is the ordinary state of an entry appended since the last checkpoint, and it is neither a failure nor a permanent one.
sourceGET /api/transparency/proof/inclusion· leaf_hash, audit_path, root_hash· audit-path nodes: 8