検証する

確率は現実になるか?

モデルがあるチームに70%の確率を与えるとき、そのチームは10回中約7回勝つはずです。このページではそれを検証します。2026ワールドカップの各試合は終了直後に採点され、以下の数字は1つの問いに答えます: 確率は自信に満ちているだけでなく、正直か?(これをキャリブレーションと呼びます。)

Track record

Proven on past tournaments

The short version: when the model says 70%, it happens about 70%. Across these 987 matches its stated chances landed within ~5.6 points of reality, and on average it rated the actual result about 35% more likely than a blind 1-in-3 guess would.

The 2026 tracker below stays empty until the first match kicks off. So to show the model has been tested, not just described, we ran it against tournaments whose results you already know. For each one, the model was rebuilt exactly as it stood the day before kickoff, then graded on every match — it never sees the result it is being marked on. That is what “graded out of sample” means: no peeking, no hindsight.

Each tournament is scored by the production model reconstructed as it stood the day before the tournament's first match: Dixon-Coles and Hierarchical Poisson refit on matches strictly beforehand, Elo rolled forward to each match, and the tournament-tier calibration layer refit on the 24 months of matches before the cutoff. No data from the tournament, or any later match, touches any layer of the fit.

Graded across 987 matches at 24 major tournaments (2014–2024)

0.572

How close the forecasts landed to reality. Lower is better; blind 1-in-3 guessing scores ≈ 0.667.

1.000

Like Brier, but overconfidence is punished harder. Lower is better; blind guessing scores ≈ 1.099.

5.6pp

Does “70%” really mean 70%? The average gap between the two. Lower is better.

Tournament by tournament

One row per tournament: the model rebuilt as it stood the day before it began, then graded on every match through the final (Brier — lower is better, blind 1-in-3 guessing is 0.667). A few thin, early editions sit above that line; the honest measure is all of them pooled, in the box above.

TournamentHostMatchesBrier
Copa América 2024United States320.522
Euro 2024Germany510.613
AFCON 2024Ivory Coast520.651
Asian Cup 2024Qatar510.515
Gold Cup 2023United States310.566
World Cup 2022Qatar640.611
AFCON 2022Cameroon520.686
Gold Cup 2021United States310.341
Copa América 2021Brazil280.481
Euro 2021England510.554
AFCON 2019Egypt520.546
Gold Cup 2019United States310.405
Copa América 2019Brazil260.542
Asian Cup 2019United Arab Emirates510.496
World Cup 2018Russia640.569
Gold Cup 2017United States250.456
AFCON 2017Gabon320.642
Euro 2016France510.668
Copa América 2016United States320.502
Gold Cup 2015United States260.755
Copa América 2015Chile260.686
AFCON 2015Equatorial Guinea320.795
Asian Cup 2015Australia320.434
World Cup 2014Brazil640.565

Reliability diagram

Read it like this: each dot is a group of similar forecasts. left-to-right is what the model predicted, bottom-to-top is how often it actually happened. When the model says 70% and that happens about 70% of the time, the dot sits on the dashed line: perfect calibration. The closer the dots hug the line, the more honest the probabilities; bigger dots mean more matches in that group.

Reliability diagramReliability diagram: predicted probability on the x-axis, observed frequency on the y-axis, binned in deciles across [0, 1]. Closer to the identity line means better-calibrated.0.000.250.500.751.000.000.250.500.751.00n=327n=478n=911n=329n=269n=217n=184n=134n=73n=39predicted probabilityobserved frequency

Brier by favourite confidence

Matches grouped by how confident the model's favourite was (its biggest of the home / draw / away probabilities) — so you can see whether it is as reliable on toss-ups as on heavy favourites.

Favourite confidenceMatchesBrier
P_fav < 40%810.649
P_fav 40-60%4760.633
P_fav 60-80%3180.512
P_fav >= 80%1120.428
  • Out-of-sample: the calibration layer is refit per tournament on pre-tournament data, so these numbers do not reuse the live shipped calibrator (which has seen these results).
  • The uniform 1/3 forecast scores a Brier of 0.667; lower is better. Major-tournament football is high-variance, so a strong model still sits well above a league-season Brier.
  • Calibrated and uncalibrated metrics are reported on the same fixtures so the calibration layer's effect is visible.

Built 2026-05-30 · model 1.0.0 · calibration layer refit on the 24 months before each tournament.

2026ワールドカップ: ライブトラッカー

Across 96 graded forecasts so far, the model's overall Brier score is 0.497 (lower is better; blind 1-in-3 guessing scores ≈ 0.667). The reliability diagram below plots what the model predicted against how often it actually came true. The closer to the diagonal, the more honest the probabilities.

Overall, across 96 scored matches

0.497

How close the forecasts landed to reality. Lower is better; blind 1-in-3 guessing scores ≈ 0.667.

0.837

Like Brier, but overconfidence is punished harder. Lower is better; blind guessing scores ≈ 1.099.

0.167

Does “70%” really mean 70%? The average gap between the two. Lower is better.

Rolling Brier, 10-match window

The model's accuracy over its most recent 10 matches, re-figured after each game. Lower is better; the dashed line is what blind 1-in-3 guessing would score, so anything below it is real skill.

Rolling Brier line chart, 10-match window across 96 scored matchesRight-aligned rolling mean of the per-match 3-class Brier score over the last 96 scored World Cup matches. Lower is better; the dashed line at 0.667 is the uniform-1/3 baseline.0.000.250.500.751.00match index (1 → 96)

Per-matchday breakdown

DateMatchesBrierLog loss
2026-06-1120.4040.723
2026-06-1220.8171.280
2026-06-1340.7711.178
2026-06-1440.5951.008
2026-06-1541.1481.632
2026-06-1640.1970.438
2026-06-1740.6401.005
2026-06-1840.4260.739
2026-06-1940.4630.787
2026-06-2040.5310.854
2026-06-2140.6030.928
2026-06-2240.2660.529
2026-06-2340.4330.706
2026-06-2460.4100.750
2026-06-2560.5060.868
2026-06-2660.3880.704
2026-06-2760.4340.763
2026-06-2920.6120.996
2026-06-3030.5000.866
2026-07-0130.4780.830
2026-07-0230.3270.622
2026-07-0330.4600.796
2026-07-0410.2250.470
2026-07-0620.4430.784
2026-07-0720.5410.909
2026-07-0910.5730.960
2026-07-1010.2800.564
2026-07-1120.2500.517
2026-07-1510.5370.911

Updated 2026-07-16.

Reliability diagram

Read it like this: each dot is a group of similar forecasts. left-to-right is what the model predicted, bottom-to-top is how often it actually happened. When the model says 70% and that happens about 70% of the time, the dot sits on the dashed line: perfect calibration. The closer the dots hug the line, the more honest the probabilities; bigger dots mean more matches in that group.

Reliability diagramReliability diagram: predicted probability on the x-axis, observed frequency on the y-axis, binned in deciles across [0, 1]. Closer to the identity line means better-calibrated.0.000.250.500.751.000.000.250.500.751.00n=27n=46n=96n=34n=22n=25n=18n=14n=4n=2predicted probabilityobserved frequency

Brier by competition

SegmentMatchesBrierΔ vs overall
World Cup 2026960.497+0.000

Brier by tournament stage

SegmentMatchesBrierΔ vs overall
Group stage720.516+0.019
Round of 32150.449-0.048
Round of 1640.492-0.005
Quarter-final40.338-0.159
Semi-final10.537+0.039
Third-place play-off
Final

Brier by favourite confidence

SegmentMatchesBrierΔ vs overall
P_fav < 40%110.669+0.172
P_fav 40-60%470.540+0.043
P_fav 60-80%320.373-0.125
P_fav >= 80%60.513+0.016

3つの数字の意味

天気予報士を想像してください。誰でも「70%の確率で雨」と言えます。優れた予報士は、70%と言ったとき実際にその通りになります。これらの3つの数字は同じようにモデルを検証します。

  • Brier score: 確率は現実に近かったか? 各試合について、予測が実際の結果からどれだけ離れていたかを測定し、平均します。完璧な水晶玉は0点。盲目的に毎回3分の1を推測すると約0.667。低いほど良い。
  • Log loss: 同じ考え方ですが、過信はより厳しく罰せられます。 ほぼ確実だと言って外すと、この数字は跳ね上がります。モデルを謙虚に保つ指標です。盲目的な推測は約1.099。低いほど良い。
  • ECE: 「70%」は本当に70%を意味するか? 「約70%」の予測をすべて集めて、実際にどのくらいの頻度でその通りになったかを確認します。すべての信頼度レベルにわたる平均ギャップがECEです。数パーセントポイントであれば、提示された確率は額面通りに受け取れます。低いほど良い。

最初の2つは正確さ大胆さの両方を評価します。最後は正直さの検証です。モデルは見栄え良く見えても、自信を過大に示すことがあります。3つすべてを一緒に測定することで、それを検出できます。

これらの数字の背後にある構成モデルとサンプル外テストを知りたい場合は、方法論ページをご覧ください。

このページの指標はモデル自身のキャリブレーションであり、実際の試合結果と照合した予測確率の比較です。

大会中キャリブレーション · onthepitch · onthepitch