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 - 32
- entry_
type delphi.question.published- entity_
type forecast_question - entity_
id 3707c33d-0301-4c72-8c13-ee685e8a0a88- logged_
at 2026-08-15T15:53:36.366127+00:00- previous_
hash de579b24c9df0f988a014675aa56b6096a138fa843b03c735bf41005a0a8176e- payload_
hash 3d93c2653b06615387dfb70cea8d1b28b57197d0eea480e1f00d9fa9662fe9a5- entry_
hash 45d9eda6f9e45bf40cf6090dcfa7aa284f5dab6fb15c82faf01cd48eaef6a53e
sourceGET /api/transparency/entries/{n}· one entry, as served to this reader· payload served
Payload
{
"slug": "will-an-eu-enforcement-action-over-ai-act-article-50-transparency-be-announced-in-2026",
"title": "Will an EU enforcement action over AI Act Article 50 transparency be announced in 2026?",
"origin": "EDITORIAL",
"timebase": {
"clock": "REAL_UTC"
},
"closes_at": "2026-09-15T22:00:00.000000Z",
"opened_at": "2026-08-15T15:53:36.362766Z",
"blind_mode": true,
"provenance": "PUBLIC_RECORD",
"description": "Article 50 transparency obligations — labelling of AI-generated content, chatbot disclosure, deepfake marking — took effect on 2 August 2026, with a grace period for pre-existing generative systems until 2 December 2026. This asks whether enforcement follows inside the calendar year.",
"question_id": "3707c33d-0301-4c72-8c13-ee685e8a0a88",
"resolution_criteria": "YES if the European Commission or a designated national market surveillance authority publicly announces a formal proceeding for breach of Article 50 of the AI Act, dated between 1 September and 31 December 2026.",
"expected_resolution_at": "2027-01-05T12:00:00.000000Z",
"canonical_source_policy": "European Commission AI regulatory framework pages at https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/regulatory-framework-ai and national authority announcements.",
"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 - 32
- tree_
size - 181
- leaf_
hash 7e5cd9da0f7214d0afc0d3ddb66937fc2ae6aa529d1f8d80d9b6cf8db521c209- audit_
path (8) 0: 68d05cc180d6b935e83d8766592b320d1545f9fb7da84856ea464c62b9cc35141: 469ed004e6fcd7d01b53b9bb1df8d886ebeb1894b0794b48826e14dec0ff0c222: a8f494186f033c69dd6178c0d51ad1f52e2f7902e8f7078f60a4b76eaf5a65e03: e0fd32a6c37370ab40664c7f00dd10aa97f83f28e9593d5626d8ca57a96fe3ca4: 44572e1f9d85cea0b2eeaa0aa227d6fb80c1e5448efb5228f587d667c12052dd5: 0dec549ee6527dafc0e801068f2df8c4eef8fcb9972397c6eb58217673bbfe9c6: 432b3bec17cc8d9bd118f5d2d11fc56d0578ec1940af60be2192f2f1b8d43dc67: 9635acfeb8c2590a96fbee35cfdc30839f075e00ba35b025d06547731fc18743- root_
hash 4c26c3ce818fe1e45410fef48bf0969b94f9e5bc0389388f5310d968c2e42fdc
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