pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.05966 · v2 · pith:JZHX4G3Pnew · submitted 2026-04-07 · 💻 cs.CL

FinReporting: An Agentic Workflow for Localized Reporting of Cross-Jurisdiction Financial Disclosures

Fan Zhang , Mingzi Song , Rania Elbadry , Yankai Chen , Shaobo Wang , Yixi Zhou , Xunwen Zheng , Yueru He
show 14 more authors
Yuyang Dai Georgi Georgiev Ayesha Gull Muhammad Usman Safder Fan Wu Liyuan Meng Fengxian Ji Junning Zhao Xueqing Peng Jimin Huang Yu Chen Xue (Steve) Liu Preslav Nakov Zhuohan Xie
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 16:47 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CL
keywords financial reportingcross-jurisdictionagentic workflowcanonical ontologyfinancial disclosuresLLM verificationXBRLaccounting standards
0
0 comments X

The pith

FinReporting builds a unified canonical ontology and agentic stages to align financial disclosures from the US, Japan, and China with LLMs as rule-bound verifiers.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Financial statements vary in structure and tagging across countries, making direct comparisons unreliable. This paper introduces FinReporting to handle that variation by first defining one shared ontology covering the income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow statement. It then breaks the work into sequential steps of acquiring filings, extracting data, mapping to the ontology, and recording anomalies. LLMs are restricted to verification tasks with explicit decision rules and evidence trails rather than open-ended generation. Evaluation on real annual reports from the United States, Japan, and China shows gains in consistency and reliability. A reader would care because standardized, auditable outputs would let investors and regulators compare companies across borders without repeated manual reconciliation.

Core claim

FinReporting constructs a unified canonical ontology spanning the income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow statement, decomposes reporting into auditable stages of filing acquisition, extraction, canonical mapping, and anomaly logging, and directs LLMs to operate as constrained verifiers under explicit decision rules with evidence grounding, resulting in improved consistency and reliability when applied to annual filings from the USA, Japan, and China.

What carries the argument

The agentic workflow that decomposes cross-jurisdiction reporting into sequential stages around a single canonical ontology and restricts LLMs to rule-guided verification with evidence.

If this is right

  • Cross-border financial statements become directly comparable through the shared ontology.
  • Anomaly logging creates an auditable trail for regulators and analysts.
  • Structured exports enable automated downstream analysis tools.
  • The staged process reduces ungrounded LLM outputs in extraction tasks.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same staged verification could apply to quarterly reports or proxy statements with modest ontology extensions.
  • Widespread adoption might surface patterns in how jurisdictions systematically differ in disclosure detail.
  • Interactive use of the released demo could let domain experts iteratively improve the ontology mappings.

Load-bearing premise

A single unified canonical ontology can be constructed to cover income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements from different jurisdictions without material loss of information or systematic mapping errors.

What would settle it

Run the workflow on a fresh set of Japanese and Chinese annual filings, then have independent accountants compare the mapped line items and totals against official English translations or XBRL tags; material mismatches in key aggregates or frequent unresolvable anomalies would show the central claim does not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05966 by Ayesha Gull, Fan Wu, Fan Zhang, Fengxian Ji, Georgi Georgiev, Jimin Huang, Junning Zhao, Liyuan Meng, Mingzi Song, Muhammad Usman Safder, Preslav Nakov, Rania Elbadry, Shaobo Wang, Xueqing Peng, Xue (Steve) Liu, Xunwen Zheng, Yankai Chen, Yixi Zhou, Yu Chen, Yueru He, Yuyang Dai, Zhuohan Xie.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Financial reporting is traditionally han [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The FinReporting demo interface. The system supports cross-jurisdiction statement browsing and reporting (US/JP/CN), with specific interested fields selected. and conversational extensions (Chen et al., 2021; Zhu et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2022; Xie et al., 2025; Qian et al., 2025b), as well as retrieval-centric long￾form settings, e.g., FinTextQA (Chen et al., 2024). In parallel, finance-oriented foundati… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Overview of FinReporting processes. porting logic. In contrast to existing XBRL-centric or single-market extraction pipelines that assume fixed taxonomies and homogeneous infrastructures, FinReporting explicitly models cross-jurisdiction heterogeneity and embeds structured verification into the reporting workflow, enabling auditable lo￾calization across heterogeneous filing regimes. 3 FinReporting System F… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Financial reporting systems increasingly leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) to extract and summarize corporate disclosures. However, most existing approaches assume a single-market setting and overlook structural differences across jurisdictions. Variations in accounting taxonomies, tagging infrastructures (e.g., XBRL vs.\ PDF), and aggregation conventions introduce substantial challenges for semantic alignment and reliable verification. Here, we aim to bridge this gap. We present FinReporting, an agentic workflow for localized cross-jurisdiction financial reporting. The system constructs a unified canonical ontology spanning the income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow statement, and decomposes reporting into auditable stages, including filing acquisition, extraction, canonical mapping, and anomaly logging. Rather than treating LLMs as free-form generators, FinReporting employs them as constrained verifiers operating under explicit decision rules with evidence grounding. Evaluated on annual filings from the USA, Japan, and China, FinReporting improves consistency and reliability under heterogeneous reporting regimes. We further release an interactive demo that enables cross-market inspection and supports structured export of localized financial statements. Our demo is available at url{https://huggingface.co/spaces/BoomQ/FinReporting-Demo. A video describing our system is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f65jdEL31Kk.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents FinReporting, an agentic workflow for localized cross-jurisdiction financial reporting. It constructs a unified canonical ontology spanning income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements, then decomposes the reporting process into auditable stages including filing acquisition, extraction, canonical mapping, and anomaly logging. LLMs are used as constrained verifiers operating under explicit decision rules with evidence grounding rather than free-form generators. The system is evaluated on annual filings from the USA, Japan, and China and claims to improve consistency and reliability under heterogeneous reporting regimes; an interactive demo is also released.

Significance. If the claimed improvements can be demonstrated with rigorous quantitative evaluation, the work addresses a practically important problem in global financial analysis where differences in accounting taxonomies, formats (XBRL vs. PDF), and conventions create alignment challenges. The agentic structure with explicit verification stages and the release of a demo are positive features that could support reproducibility and further development.

major comments (2)
  1. Abstract: the central claim that FinReporting 'improves consistency and reliability' supplies no quantitative metrics, baselines, error bars, or evaluation protocol, so the result cannot be verified from the manuscript text.
  2. Abstract: the construction of a single 'unified canonical ontology' for cross-jurisdiction statements is presented as resolving semantic alignment, yet the text does not examine or mitigate risks of material information loss or systematic mapping errors arising from jurisdiction-specific rules (e.g., revenue recognition, aggregation conventions, XBRL vs. PDF).
minor comments (1)
  1. Abstract: the demo URL and video link are given but the manuscript would benefit from a brief description of how the demo enables cross-market inspection and structured export.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed feedback on our manuscript. We have reviewed the major comments carefully and provide point-by-point responses below, indicating the revisions we intend to make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract: the central claim that FinReporting 'improves consistency and reliability' supplies no quantitative metrics, baselines, error bars, or evaluation protocol, so the result cannot be verified from the manuscript text.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including concrete quantitative support for the claimed improvements. The full manuscript contains an evaluation on annual filings from the USA, Japan, and China that reports specific consistency and reliability metrics along with comparisons to baseline extraction methods. To make these results immediately verifiable from the abstract, we will revise it to report key quantitative findings (e.g., alignment accuracy gains and anomaly reduction rates) together with a concise description of the evaluation protocol and dataset. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Abstract: the construction of a single 'unified canonical ontology' for cross-jurisdiction statements is presented as resolving semantic alignment, yet the text does not examine or mitigate risks of material information loss or systematic mapping errors arising from jurisdiction-specific rules (e.g., revenue recognition, aggregation conventions, XBRL vs. PDF).

    Authors: This observation is fair. While the manuscript describes the canonical mapping stage and relies on constrained verification plus anomaly logging to surface discrepancies, it does not contain an explicit analysis of risks such as material information loss or systematic errors stemming from jurisdiction-specific accounting rules. We will add a dedicated discussion subsection (likely in the Methodology or Evaluation section) that examines these risks with concrete examples drawn from revenue recognition differences, aggregation conventions, and format variations (XBRL versus PDF). The subsection will also clarify how the staged, evidence-grounded verification process is intended to detect and mitigate such errors. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: descriptive engineering workflow with empirical evaluation

full rationale

The paper presents FinReporting as an agentic workflow that constructs a unified canonical ontology for financial statements across jurisdictions and applies it through staged processing (acquisition, extraction, mapping, verification). No equations, fitted parameters, or derived predictions appear in the provided text. The central claim of improved consistency is framed as an empirical outcome from evaluation on USA, Japan, and China filings rather than a quantity forced by definition or self-citation. No load-bearing self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes are invoked that reduce the result to prior inputs. This matches the default case of a self-contained engineering artifact.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, so the ledger records the explicit structural assumptions stated there.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption A unified canonical ontology can be constructed that accurately spans income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements across jurisdictions.
    Invoked as the foundation for the mapping stage in the abstract.
  • domain assumption LLMs can function reliably as constrained verifiers when given explicit decision rules and evidence-grounding requirements.
    Stated as the operational mode for the extraction and verification stages.
invented entities (1)
  • Canonical ontology for cross-jurisdiction financial statements no independent evidence
    purpose: Provide a common target structure for mapping heterogeneous filings
    Introduced in the abstract as the central unifying artifact.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5845 in / 1377 out tokens · 42390 ms · 2026-05-19T16:47:45.328770+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

2 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Published: 2024-03-27

    https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standar ds/ifrs-taxonomy/ifrs-accounting-taxonom y-2024/. Published: 2024-03-27. Accessed: 2026- 02-26. Subhendu Khatuya. 2024. Parameter efficient instruc- tion tuning of llms for financial applications. InPro- ceedings of the Thirty-Third International Joint Con- ference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-24, pages 8494–8495. ...

    work page arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance.CoRR, abs/2303.17564. Qianqian Xie, Weiguang Han, Zhengyu Chen, Ruoyu Xiang, Xiao Zhang, Yueru He, Mengxi Xiao, Dong Li, Yongfu Dai, Duanyu Feng, Yijing Xu, Haoqiang Kang, Ziyan Kuang, Chenhan Yuan, Kailai Yang, Zheheng Luo, Tianlin Zhang, Zhiwei Liu, Guojun Xiong, Zhiyang Deng, Yuechen Jiang, Zhiyuan Yao, ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024