EventGraph：

These statements describe a monotonic relationship among time-based contracts: the probability of an event by March 31 (P(Mar31)) must be less than or equal to the probability of it happening in 2025 (P(2025)), which in turn must be less than or equal to the probability of it occurring before 2027 (P(before2027)). This reflects the nested calendar logic—if the event happens by March 31, it necessarily occurs within 2025, and if it occurs within 2025, it must also occur before 2027. Therefore, the near-term contract provides an upper bound on the probabilities of longer-dated contracts.

IFactual and Sentiment Interpretation ：

Temporal nesting: if a blockade is verified by June 30, it necessarily implies the Dec 31 blockade-by-year-end condition is met; updates about the earlier window directly inform the later window.
Primary fresh items describe large PLA exercises/live-fire drills and explicitly mention simulating or encircling/blockade scenarios, but none constitute a verified blockade occurrence (resolution-critical fact). Signals therefore register as sentiment-led increases toward YES for both nested time-window events. Many other retrieved articles (diplomacy/travel/defense procurement) are background and do not map cleanly to the blockade-occurrence verification criterion, creating an attention-allocation gap versus the core resolution fact.

Structural Gap Engine：

Two nested-deadline markets are linked by a direct temporal-sequence constraint, so updates to the earlier window should mechanically inform the later window. With an attention-allocation mismatch flagged, the longer window can lag in incorporating the informational structure even when direct factual signals are weak.

ROI Evaluation Engine：

Enter when laggard price increases by ~4.95% from baseline (structural_gap=0.0495).
Exit if laggard moves ~1.98% against expected direction (max_downside_tolerance≈0.4×structural_gap).
Exit when laggard moves ~3.96% toward driver (convergence_multiplier×structural_gap = 0.8×0.0495).