← the log
sequence 6

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.

01. Link to this band.

The entry

entry_hash3c43d2c50ee0. The chained hash of entry 6, which is what every proof on this page is about.REAL_UTC
sequence_number
6
entry_type
delphi.question.published
entity_type
forecast_question
entity_id
07118885-847c-4a15-b18f-40fe970bd6c6
logged_at
2026-08-15T15:53:35.097847+00:00
previous_hash
54d90667946c33f025ca9ada96823f5d940c7224217bfc6da2032fe82405dae3
payload_hash
95503d620997d9e758a472cca79bea5b17ff95826fb23a0d3f0ba4eb5c160cc4
entry_hash
3c43d2c50ee0e92897d6b8362ab2982206c7d509d794b92564d6b81ea91baa7c

sourceGET /api/transparency/entries/{n}· one entry, as served to this reader· payload served

02. Link to this band.

Payload

{
  "slug": "will-the-ecb-cut-the-deposit-facility-rate-at-its-29-october-2026-meeting",
  "title": "Will the ECB cut the deposit facility rate at its 29 October 2026 meeting?",
  "origin": "EDITORIAL",
  "timebase": {
    "clock": "REAL_UTC"
  },
  "closes_at": "2026-10-29T11:00:00.000000Z",
  "opened_at": "2026-08-15T15:53:35.094383Z",
  "blind_mode": true,
  "provenance": "PUBLIC_RECORD",
  "description": "The second Governing Council meeting inside the window. Asked as a directional question rather than as a hold, so that the pair of ECB questions does not resolve on the same reasoning.",
  "question_id": "07118885-847c-4a15-b18f-40fe970bd6c6",
  "resolution_criteria": "YES if the deposit facility rate after the decision of 29 October 2026 is lower than the rate in force on 28 October 2026.",
  "expected_resolution_at": "2026-10-29T14:00:00.000000Z",
  "canonical_source_policy": "ECB monetary policy decisions at https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/govcdec/mopo/html/index.en.html.",
  "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.

03. Link to this band.

Verify it here

computed in your browser, not on the server

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
6
tree_size
179
leaf_hash
7867df5f2558424f4aa9a5485583898eecea5d6676eed273adc124c96f75d2f1
audit_path (8)
0: a5c27c5065216331c2a83cf9ed9226752e55f7f8baabbf6e6b2faf3a5e1f2b5b1: 2e048440eafa7d3d8c7cf039b9ab4a7a615d09287a95fff9eeadc9dceb5215d82: c46f68fc5f6d0676e6a592aca2eb0ccd91364c312bbd202fdc2603dc938c6a353: 6accee06a91eebe583c1229064362cefcdec41ff4bb0d38479e32b13cdf4cc7a4: 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