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 - 42
- entry_
type delphi.question.published- entity_
type forecast_question - entity_
id fc61e6d4-5001-4db0-95d4-be60a131bd47- logged_
at 2026-08-15T15:53:36.856345+00:00- previous_
hash 50d83cb7376913edc79230f28c061a2c048407738074e78ab12085bad9405283- payload_
hash 5149521571be38f98fc8b9513db27ac00f92403d9fe4f5d7ad7d0db2896c348d- entry_
hash ba0d893a6deb5f07ade6de6a416cd274ab89e53b49c87127e856cb2a4b377bbb
sourceGET /api/transparency/entries/{n}· one entry, as served to this reader· payload served
Payload
{
"slug": "will-a-commercial-lunar-lander-achieve-a-soft-landing-between-september-and-december-2026",
"title": "Will a commercial lunar lander achieve a soft landing between September and December 2026?",
"origin": "EDITORIAL",
"timebase": {
"clock": "REAL_UTC"
},
"closes_at": "2026-09-01T12:00:00.000000Z",
"opened_at": "2026-08-15T15:53:36.853513Z",
"blind_mode": true,
"provenance": "PUBLIC_RECORD",
"description": "Several commercial lunar missions are indicated for the second half of 2026 under NASA's CLPS programme. The record of the programme so far includes both successes and landers that arrived intact but on their side.",
"question_id": "fc61e6d4-5001-4db0-95d4-be60a131bd47",
"resolution_criteria": "YES if NASA or the operating company officially confirms that a commercial lander touched down softly on the Moon between 1 September and 31 December 2026 and transmitted telemetry after landing. An impact, or a landing that ends without function, resolves NO.",
"expected_resolution_at": "2027-01-05T12:00:00.000000Z",
"canonical_source_policy": "NASA CLPS pages at https://www.nasa.gov/commercial-lunar-payload-services/ and the operator's own newsroom.",
"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 - 42
- tree_
size - 181
- leaf_
hash ce5f3c8dfd6cb6c33042e637cf20e54586afa4c08ab67c98cb39bccea7c590fb- audit_
path (8) 0: 1e51334fbd19fcc8fef4ad9929120b16ce7d1f5d535271dcc7310c1c7e7ffbf91: b0c7989a53823657c26c016a3e79f9bed2f9b53f0ee608f103326d7be1631c552: 0baf3654c73426a38b560fa17a3cc926f6f5ba7d82e6a066c94ef3def4ed58c93: eaeacbd8d319b9d776cf6f767329e32539ccecb621836ffea46c36ad501849234: 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