Loading
Daily market read
Certainty reflects how much of this market we measured, not how good the market is.
Too much of the trading came from wallets we cannot yet identify, so participant-flow coverage is uncertain.
Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
The diligence packet carries the memo language, audit chain, and the Markdown, PDF, and JSON exports for this market.
Open the diligence packetWhy this rating
Composite 45 · Do not cite
Measurement certainty
Low
2 measured · 3 modeled · 1 not assessed
Certainty reflects how much of this market we measured, not how good the market is.
4 full-provenance Coherent Markets Engine signals linked to this condition; 22 price-observation checkpoints recorded.
Resolution rules
Rules as stated by Polymarket, reproduced verbatim. Convexly has not independently reviewed them and does not endorse them; the rating's resolution-reliability pillar treats rule text as present but not independently reviewed.
This market will resolve to "Yes" if any Anthropic Claude model achieves at least the specified accuracy on Humanity’s Last Exam by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No". For resolution, “accuracy” refers solely to the value labeled “HLE Accuracy” or a clear equivalent metric if the data’s presentation or terminology is restructured, regardless of the model’s Calibration Error or any other displayed metric. The resolution source will be the official Humanity’s Last Exam leaderboard at https://agi.safe.ai/. If the resolution source becomes unavailable during the listed timeframe, this market will remain open to allow the relevant data to become available again. If the source remains unavailable after the end of the listed timeframe or is otherwise confirmed to be permanently unavailable, official Humanity’s Last Exam results published elsewhere may be used. If no official alternative source is available, this market will resolve to "No".
Experimental rating caveat
Market Trust Cards are experimental market-quality diagnostics, not compliance certifications or validated credit ratings.
What travels with this read
Market Trust is a canary preview: verdict cutpoints are operator-set, and each read is a dated, descriptive diagnostic of market quality, not a prediction of the outcome and not a claim about what the probability should be. A prospective calibration test is filed and matures on resolved outcomes.
Sign in to see recent trades our collectors observed here: side, size, price, and time for every recorded fill.
Create a free accountQuote it verbatim. The number and its bound travel together; the method is frozen and the per-wallet table is public.
Convexly rates this polymarket market "Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 55% or higher?" as Do not cite, as of 2026-08-08 (UTC).
Per Convexly Market Trust, the polymarket market "Will the highest score achieved by an Anthropic Claude model on Humanity’s Last Exam in 2026 be 55% or higher?" is rated Do not cite as of 2026-08-08T10:15:52.003Z (UTC). The rating describes whether the quoted market price was a clean enough data object to cite at that timestamp. This citation is market diligence, not investment advice, not a trading instruction, not a forecast, and not proof that the market probability is correct. Daily read: https://www.convexly.app/markets/will-the-highest-score-achieved-by-an-anthropic-claude-model-on-humanitys-last-exam-in-2026-be-55-or-higher-20260723190836286
Canonical URL: https://www.convexly.app/markets/will-the-highest-score-achieved-by-an-anthropic-claude-model-on-humanitys-last-exam-in-2026-be-55-or-higher-20260723190836286
Boundary of this page
This daily read is market diligence, not investment advice, not a claim of absolute truth, and not proof that any trader should buy or sell. It answers whether this market price had enough substrate to cite, monitor, discount, or ignore at the as-of timestamp, with receipts attached in the diligence packet.
Executability scored as worse-of(spread, depth) from a single orderbook snapshot; the two were merged from the former liquidity + depth pillars to stop double-counting one correlated source.
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
Participant flow inputs exist but do not meet identity-coverage floors; descriptive only.
Mild concentration or coordination signals; review before citing.
3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
How it adds up: composite = Σ(score × weight) / Σ(weight) across measured + heuristic pillars only. Pending and data-rights-blocked pillars are excluded from both numerator and denominator. Total contributing weight = 80.0.
Caveat: 1 pillar not assessed yet; the score will recompute as the substrate fills in.
Convexly is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Polymarket or Manifold. Wallet and market data are derived from publicly available venue sources.
© Convexly 2026