How to us open interest for prediction?

Some academic research has focused on potential flaws with the prediction market concept. In particular, Dr. Charles F. Manksi of the Northwestern University Department of Economics published a paper in 2004, “Interpreting the Predictions of Prediction Markets”, in which he attempts to show mathematically that under a wide range of assumptions the "predictions" of such markets do not closely correspond to the actual probability beliefs of the market participants unless the market probability is near either 0 or 1. Manski suggests that directly asking a group of participants to estimate probabilities may lead to better results. However, Steven Gjerstad (Purdue) in his paper "Risk Aversion, Beliefs, and Prediction Market Equilibrium" has shown that prediction market prices are typically very close to the mean belief of market participants if the distribution of beliefs is smooth (as with a normal distribution, for example). Justin Wolfers (Wharton) and Eric Zitzewitz (Stanford) have obtained similar results, and also include some analysis of prediction market data, in their paper "Interpreting Prediction Market Prices as Probabilities" . In practice, the prices of binary prediction markets have proven to be closely related to actual frequencies of event in the real world. Relevant data has been published in Pennock et al's "The real power of artificial markets" (Science, 2001) and Servan-Schreiber et al's "Prediction Markets: Does Money Matter?" (Electronic Markets, 2004).