比较 Polymarket 与 Kalshi 的事件最终裁定

文章 arXiv papers · 作者: Maksym Nechepurenko

总结

本研究阐释了为何不能仅凭“已解决”或“已最终确定”等标签比较 Polymarket 与 Kalshi 的事件合约结算。研究将各平台的流程映射为功能阶段，包括裁定或确定、公开端点记录、可领取赔付以及赎回。随后提出一份比较证书，用于检查赔付含义、端点功能、日历覆盖范围、删失、证据质量和依赖单位是否一致，然后再估算共同持续时间。

文档报告了各平台特有的记录数量，以及从确定到端点的配对观察结果，同时强调这些是平台内结果，而非跨平台估计。研究区分了精确配对、区间限定配对和标准化非配对比较。局限包括：部分中间变更的生命周期证据稀少；历史上的多市场计时规则存在不确定性；公开的最终确定状态并不能揭示成员的现金情况。在获得可比的决策时钟和事件定义之前，跨平台估计仍为时过早。

核心观点

仅凭事件标签，无法证明两个平台衡量的是同一个最终状态端点。
有效的持续时间比较要求赔付语义、端点作用、日历、删失、证据等级和依赖单位相互一致。
精确配对、区间限定配对和标准化非配对比较对应不同的估计目标。
公开端点信息完整，并不保证能够看到中间修订或成员现金情况。
跨平台数值比较需要可比的决策时钟，以及语义和日历登记表。

# Two Models of Event Finality: Functional Alignment, Contestability, and Empirical Comparability on Polymarket and Kalshi


# Two Models of Event Finality: Functional Alignment, Contestability, and Empirical Comparability on Polymarket and Kalshi









Event contracts reach economic finality through different institutional paths. Polymarket distinguishes oracle adjudication, adapter consumption, Conditional Tokens payout recording, technical redeemability, and optional holder redemption. Kalshi distinguishes venue determination, public finalization, lifecycle messages, and exact REST settlement fields. Resolved, settled, and finalized do not themselves define comparable endpoints. We define a mechanism-aware comparison certificate using functional roles rather than common labels. A scalar cross-venue duration is admissible only when payoff semantics, endpoint functions, calendar support, censoring, observation grades, and dependence units are jointly aligned. We separate exact paired, interval-qualified paired, and standardized unpaired estimands. Polymarket evidence contains 108,638 exact-linked conditions, 99,283 protocol payout records, 92,158 observed redemptions of any amount, and 91,817 observed positive-payout redemptions. Kalshi evidence contains 152,694 ordinary markets reconstructed as at risk at the enrollment boundary and 7,611,594 exact MVE market objects. Exact public endpoints cover 71,657 ordinary markets and 7,357,576 MVE objects. Exact determination-to-endpoint pairs total 70,979 for ordinary markets and 126,806 for MVE. These are Kalshi-native finality results, not Polymarket-Kalshi estimates. REST endpoint completeness can be high when exact lifecycle paths are sparse, and transport gaps can preserve two exact clocks while preventing claims about intermediate revisions. Current MVE timer fields do not identify historical version-consistent timer rules, and public finalization does not identify member cash. Cross-venue numerical comparison remains blocked until Paper 7.3 supplies blind first/stable decidability clocks and a semantic/calendar registry establishes genuinely comparable events and endpoints.

在遵守原作品许可的前提下，附作者信息全文展示。许可协议: abstract CC0

此摘要由 Stratmill 研究智能体根据原文撰写，并非原文副本。