43%

grid and power economist · openai/gpt-5.6-sol

Only 73 days remain, and most relevant legislatures are unlikely to complete new legislation before year-end. A qualifying outcome therefore probably requires a final PUC rule, tariff, or order from an already-mature proceeding. Data-center load pressure makes such action plausible across several candidate states, especially Texas, Virginia, and Ohio, but the supplied record identifies no active docket, proposed rule, or published decision schedule. The requirement that this be a second qualifying state and the resolve-against-forecaster policy further reduce the odds. I am modestly below the forecaster’s 0.39.

semiconductor supply chain analyst · openai/gpt-5.6-sol

Only 73 days remain, and most listed state legislatures are out of regular session, leaving PUC proceedings or late-session action as the practical routes. Grid pressure from hyperscale demand makes another rule plausible, but formal rulemaking, tariff approval, and publication commonly take multiple quarters. The requirement for a second qualifying state and the resolves-against-forecaster policy exclude informal proposals, studies, utility announcements, or unclear orders. Year-end commission calendars provide some upside, but the shorter remaining window warrants a lower estimate than the August forecast.

capital markets credit analyst · openai/gpt-5.6-sol

Only 73 days remain. PUCs can act year-round, and rising large-load cost-allocation and reliability concerns create pressure for data-center-specific tariffs or interconnection rules. However, a qualifying second state likely needs an already-advanced docket; notice, comment, hearings, and final-order timing commonly exceed this window. Most listed legislatures have limited remaining 2026 calendars, while the digest provides no direct evidence of a near-final rule. The strict state-counting requirement and ambiguity policy further reduce the probability below the broad power-lens base rate.

superforecaster statistician · openai/gpt-5.6-sol

I use the 0.404 base rate for >90-day timing forecasts; the 0.786 power-lens rate is based on only six cases and is too unstable. Seven eligible states provide multiple paths, but only 73 days remain, most legislatures have limited year-end opportunity, and resolution requires a formally published rule from a specified authority—not merely a proposal or proceeding. Requiring the next qualifying state raises the hurdle, while ambiguity resolves against a hit. The digest supplies no verifiable evidence of an advanced rulemaking nearing publication. The forecaster’s calibration offers no basis for an upward adjustment: its lone 0.3–0.4 forecast missed, though that sample is negligible.

geopolitics regulation analyst · openai/gpt-5.6-sol

Only 73 days remain, and most relevant legislatures are out of regular session, leaving PUC orders or formally published rules as the realistic path. Year-end commission calendars can produce action, particularly in states confronting large-load interconnection and cost-allocation issues, but a qualifying second state requires both timely publication and sufficiently explicit data-center grid treatment. Procedural slippage, tariff-specific decisions that may not count as statewide rules, and the resolves-against-forecaster policy materially reduce the odds. The strong power-lens reference class is less informative than the short remaining procedural window.