arXiv:2608. 07400v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Financial question answering is typically evaluated by answer correctness, yet in SEC filings a plausible and even numerically correct answer can be grounded in the wrong evidence.
By Sasan Mansouri, Daniel Saad, Mark Wahrenburg, Manu Weissel, Fabian Woebbeking
arXiv:2605. 05409v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Financial document question answering (QA) demands complex multi-step numerical reasoning over heterogeneous evidence--structured tables, textual narratives, and footnotes--scattered across corporate filings.
By Yang Shu, Yingmin Liu, Zequn Xie
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
arXiv:2607. 22841v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We present DS@GT's submission to FinMMEval 2026 Task 1, a multilingual financial exam question answering benchmark spanning English, Spanish, Greek, Chinese, and Hindi.
By Justice Ayela, Kabir Sahni
CIFQA is a deterministic, tool‑grounded multi‑agent framework that separates language understanding from numerical execution for financial question answering. It assigns specialized agents for interpretation, routing, parameter extraction, computation planning, and response generation, while deterministic Python tools perform the calculations. On a fixed‑deposit benchmark, CIFQA achieves 95.54% accuracy on calculation‑intensive queries and 90.87% overall, outperforming larger LLM baselines and showing that architecture, not scale, drives numerical reliability.
By Kunjesh Parekh, Anil Kumar Tiwari, Divya Saxena
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:2603. 19225v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Real-world financial decision-making is a challenging problem that requires reasoning over heterogeneous signals, including company fundamentals derived from regulatory filings and trading signals computed from price dynamics.
By Yogesh Agrawal, Aniruddha Dutta, Md Mahadi Hasan, Santu Karmaker, Aritra Dutta
arXiv:2606. 23032v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: 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.
By Mostapha Benhenda
FinRCA-Bench is a synthetic benchmark designed to evaluate evidence retrieval and reasoning in financial AI systems, specifically for accounts‑payable‑to‑bank reconciliation. It contains 2,250 cases across 14 operational tables, with 1,500 injected failures in 15 causal categories and 750 hard‑negative cases, and hides root‑cause labels and evidence contracts to isolate retrieval performance. Experiments show that retrieval architecture dramatically affects accuracy, with structured retrieval methods like Typed Provenance Graph Retrieval vastly improving macro‑recall and exact‑class accuracy compared to dense semantic retrieval or classical ML.
arXiv:2606. 18192v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As high-quality public web corpora become increasingly exhausted, clean long-context documents have become a scarce and expensive source of training data for large language models (LLMs).
By Nick Bettencourt, Xiaowei Ding, Kay Giesecke
arXiv:2608. 04374v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models can produce fluent financial analysis, but fluency alone does not establish whether a report is suitable for institutional delivery.
By Yinghao Tang, Tan Zhenwei, Yiyao Wang, Wanli Gu, Xiaolu Zhang, Jun Zhou, Wei Chen
FinRCA-Bench is a deterministic synthetic benchmark comprising 2,250 accounts‑payable‑to‑bank reconciliation cases that span 14 operational tables and include 1,500 injected failures across 15 causal categories. The benchmark hides root‑cause labels and record‑level evidence contracts from models, enabling independent evaluation of evidence retrieval versus reasoning accuracy. Experiments show that retrieval architecture dramatically influences performance, with retrieval improvements raising macro‑required‑record recall from 0.83% to 77.70% and exact 16‑class accuracy from 2.05% to 72.44%.
By Pratik Ghawate