arXiv AI

When Summaries Distort Decisions: Information Fidelity in LLM-Compressed Financial Analysis

arXiv:2606. 29251v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Financial decision-makers face more information than they can directly inspect, making context compression necessary.

arXiv AI
Jun 12

Fin-RATE: A Real-world Financial Analytics and Tracking Evaluation Benchmark for LLMs on SEC Filings

arXiv:2602. 07294v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: With the increasing deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) in the finance domain, LLMs are increasingly expected to parse complex regulatory disclosures.

By Yidong Jiang, Junrong Chen, Eftychia Makri, Jialin Chen, Peiwen Li, Ali Maatouk, Leandros Tassiulas, Eliot Brenner, Bing Xiang, Rex Ying
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 29

Diagnosing Fine-Grained Inconsistency Classification in Financial Disclosure Text

Financial disclosures contain numerical claims, temporal statements, entity references, policy commitments, and risk descriptions that may conflict in qualitatively different ways. Detecting a conflict is only the first step: review workflows may also need to determine its type, since numerical, temporal, referential, factual, and normative inconsistencies require different evidence and downstream checks.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 22

IPO Finance Agent: Evaluation of LLM Financial Analysts beyond Finance Agent v2, with Automated Rubric Generation -- the Case of the SpaceX (SPCX) IPO

Finance Agent v2 (by Vals AI) has emerged as the reference benchmark for evaluating both Anthropic Claude and OpenAI ChatGPT frontier language models on financial tasks. However, it narrowly deals with periodic reporting from publicly traded companies (SEC 10-K and 10-Q filings), and its agentic harness relies on naive, unenriched chunk retrieval.

arXiv AI
3d ago

CLAIR-Fin: An Adversarial Multi-Agent Framework for Claim-Level Verification and Adaptive Debate in Cross-Modal Financial QA

arXiv:2608. 13706v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Existing defenses against hallucination in retrieval-augmented and multi-agent pipelines remain partial: evidence is trusted despite modality disagreement, debate verifies an aggregate report rather than individual claims, and such verification occurs only after drafting, leaving inter-agent errors undetected until the final text.

By Fatema Tuj Johora Faria, Mukaffi Bin Moin, Jubayer Al Mahmud, M. F. Mridha, Md. Alam Hossain