REVIEW 1 cited by
Beyond the Reported Cutoff: Where Large Language Models Fall Short on Financial Knowledge
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are frequently utilized as sources of knowledge for question-answering. While it is known that LLMs may lack access to real-time data or newer data produced after the model's cutoff date, it is less clear how their knowledge spans across historical information. In this study, we assess the breadth of LLMs' knowledge using financial data of U.S. publicly traded companies by evaluating more than 197k questions and comparing model responses to factual data. We further explore the impact of company characteristics, such as size, retail investment, institutional attention, and readability of financial filings, on the accuracy of knowledge represented in LLMs. Our results reveal that LLMs are less informed about past financial performance, but they display a stronger awareness of larger companies and more recent information. Interestingly, at the same time, our analysis also reveals that LLMs are more likely to hallucinate for larger companies, especially for data from more recent years. The code, prompts, and model outputs are available on GitHub.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
ReasoningTrack: Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Long-term Vision-Language Tracking
FAITH masks numbers in real 10-K reports to test when financial LLMs hallucinate, and finds even top models err on 10-20% of multi-step calculations.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.