Superforecasting the Origins of the Covid-19 Pandemic

Source: Superforecasting the Origins of the Covid-19 Pandemic
Publisher: Good Judgment News and Insights | Author: Good Judgment
Published: March 11, 2024 | Archived: July 13, 2026

Forecast histogram of each Superforecaster’s probability of the biomedical research-related accident hypothesis.

Summary of Key Themes

In their extensive discussions, Good Judgment’s Superforecasters assessed base rates and historical patterns, existing evidence and scientific analysis, geopolitical context and transparency concerns, trust in intelligence communities, and methodological constraints. These themes are explored in the full report.

Red-Teaming and Other Notes

Good Judgment’s Superforecasters stated they would be willing to change their minds in the event that new evidence emerged, such as identification of an ancestor virus or definitive animal host. Alternatively, new evidence suggesting a lab leak, such as records showing that Chinese researchers were ordering DNA sequences that unequivocally corresponded to SARS-CoV-2 from commercial suppliers, would cause the Superforecasters to update their projections that a laboratory leak was the origin of Covid-19.

Of note is that among this group of Superforecasters were multiple scientists and medical professionals with expert knowledge of epidemiology and virology. Their interpretations of published studies helped the crowd reach a better common understanding of the complex scientific issues being discussed. In the end, most Superforecasters were in rough agreement on issues like the base rates of zoonotic spillover. Where they most often disagreed was on the interpretation of actions by Chinese officials and whether their actions reflected how an authoritarian government would react in any crisis over which it did not have full control, or whether those actions were indicative of attempts to cover up a biomedical research-related accident that allowed the SARS-CoV-2 virus to enter circulation in China and, ultimately, the entire globe.

You can access the full report from our Case Studies page here or using the direct link.

About Good Judgment

In 2011, IARPA—the US intelligence community’s equivalent to DARPA—launched a massive competition to identify cutting-edge methods to forecast geopolitical events. Four years, 500 questions, and over a million forecasts later, the Good Judgment Project (GJP)—led by Philip Tetlock and Barbara Mellers at the University of Pennsylvania—emerged as the undisputed victor in the tournament. GJP’s forecasts were so accurate that they even outperformed intelligence analysts with access to classified data.

Good Judgment Inc is now making this winning approach to harnessing the wisdom of the crowd available for commercial use. Our clients benefit from the externally validated forecasting methodology that made the Good Judgment Project so successful.

Today, Good Judgment’s professional Superforecasters deliver unparalleled accuracy on forecasting questions across the political, economic and social spectrum. And, we train others to apply this evidence-based methodology within their own teams.

Learn more