arXiv subjects

Zhuohan Xie

Publications and source records attributed to Zhuohan Xie.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2026

EngTrace: A Symbolic Benchmark for Verifiable Process Supervision of Engineering Reasoning

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly entering specialized, safety-critical engineering workflows governed by strict quantitative standards and immutable physical laws, making rigorous evaluation of their reasoning capabilities imperative. However, existing benchmarks such as MMLU, MATH, and HumanEval assess isolated cognitive skills, failing to capture the physically grounded reasoning central to engineering, where scientific principles, quantitative modeling, and practical constraints must converge. To enable verifiable process supervision in engineering, we introduce EngTrace, a symbolic benchmark built on 90 parameterized templates, each generating unique, contamination-resistant problem instances, spanning three major engineering branches, nine core domains, and 20 distinct areas, yielding 1,350 test cases that stress-test generalization across diverse physical scenarios. Moving beyond outcome matching, we introduce a verifiable two-stage evaluation framework that uses a tiered protocol to validate intermediate reasoning traces alongside final answers through automated procedural checks and a heterogeneous AI Tribunal. Our evaluation of 27 leading LLMs reveals a distinct trade-off between numeric precision and trace fidelity, identifying a complexity cliff where abstract mathematical pre-training fails to translate into the integrative reasoning required for advanced engineering tasks.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Can LLMs Be CEOs? Benchmarking Strategic Resource Reallocation with Multi-Role Agent Simulation

Evaluating the decision-making capabilities of large language models (LLMs) is a growing research priority, yet existing benchmarks focus on isolated cognitive tasks such as reasoning, knowledge retrieval, and economic rationality in stylized settings. These evaluations overlook the defining challenge of real executive decision-making: integrating conflicting recommendations from specialized stakeholders under information asymmetry, organizational constraints, and temporal dependencies. We introduce \textsc{CEO-Bench}, a multi-agent benchmark that evaluates LLMs on CEO-level strategic resource reallocation -- the process of redirecting capital across business units in a multi-round, constraint-rich organizational environment. In \textsc{CEO-Bench}, LLM agents receive conflicting advice from four role-conditioned C-suite advisors (CFO, CTO, COO, CMO), each with private signals and distinct priorities, and must synthesize these into a concrete allocation plan evaluated along four dimensions: role integration, conditional boldness, history-sensitive judgment, and plan validity. Experiments across five frontier models on 13 scenarios reveal that all models achieve high structural validity but diverge sharply on strategic calibration -- the hardest capability layer. We identify systematic failure modes including single-advisor capture, conservative default under ambiguity, and historical amnesia, and uncover a structural integration-boldness tradeoff: models that engage more deeply with conflicting perspectives tend to produce less decisive action. These findings delineate the current capability boundary of LLMs as organizational decision-makers and inform the design of future AI-assisted executive systems.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Herculean: An Agentic Benchmark for Financial Intelligence

As AI agents improve, the central question is no longer whether they can solve isolated well-defined financial tasks, but whether they can reliably carry out financial professional work. Existing financial benchmarks offer only a partial view of this ability, as they primarily evaluate static competencies such as question answering, retrieval, summarization, and classification. We introduce Herculean, the first skilled benchmark for agentic financial intelligence spanning four representative workflows, including Trading, Hedging, Market Insights, and Auditing. Each workflow is instantiated as a standardized MCP-based skill environment with its own tools, interaction dynamics, constraints, and success criteria, enabling consistent end-to-end assessment of heterogeneous agent systems. Across frontier agents, we find agents perform relatively well on Trading and Market Insights, but struggle substantially on Hedging and Auditing, where long-horizon coordination, state consistency, and structured verification are critical. Overall, our results point to a key gap in current agents in turning financial reasoning into dependable workflow execution in high-stakes financial workflows.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Conv-FinRe: A Conversational and Longitudinal Benchmark for Utility-Grounded Financial Recommendation

Most recommendation benchmarks evaluate how well a model imitates user behavior. In financial advisory, however, observed actions can be noisy or short-sighted under market volatility and may conflict with a user's long-term goals. Treating what users chose as the sole ground truth, therefore, conflates behavioral imitation with decision quality. We introduce Conv-FinRe, a conversational and longitudinal benchmark for stock recommendation that evaluates LLMs beyond behavior matching. Given an onboarding interview, step-wise market context, and advisory dialogues, models must generate rankings over a fixed investment horizon. Crucially, Conv-FinRe provides multi-view references that distinguish descriptive behavior from normative utility grounded in investor-specific risk preferences, enabling diagnosis of whether an LLM follows rational analysis, mimics user noise, or is driven by market momentum. We build the benchmark from real market data and human decision trajectories, instantiate controlled advisory conversations, and evaluate a suite of state-of-the-art LLMs. Results reveal a persistent tension between rational decision quality and behavioral alignment: models that perform well on utility-based ranking often fail to match user choices, whereas behaviorally aligned models can overfit short-term noise. The dataset is publicly released on Hugging Face, and the codebase is available on GitHub.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

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

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.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

The Geometry of Forgetting: Temporal Knowledge Drift as an Independent Axis in LLM Representations

Large language models confidently produce outdated answers, and no existing method can detect them. We show this is not an engineering failure but a structural one: temporal drift, whether a stored fact has changed since training, is encoded as a direction in the residual stream geometrically orthogonal to both correctness and uncertainty. Any method operating on correctness or uncertainty signals is therefore blind to drift by construction. We verify this across six instruction-tuned models. A linear probe trained directly on drift labels achieves AUROC $0.83$--$0.95$; methods based on token entropy, semantic entropy, CCS, and SAPLMA all remain near chance ($0.49$--$0.57$). Five tests confirm the geometric orthogonality: weight cosines ($|\cos| \leq 0.14$), score correlations ($|r| \leq 0.20$), bidirectional null-space projection ($|Δ| \leq 0.008$), iterative null-space projection with $k{=}10$, and difference-of-means dissociation. Mechanistically, the MLP retrieval circuit produces identical dynamics for stale recall and confabulation ($r > 0.81$, six models), explaining why output confidence cannot separate them. A cross-cutoff experiment holds inputs constant and varies only the model: the probe fires on the model whose training predates the fact's transition and stays silent otherwise ($P(A{>}B) = 0.975$--$0.998$, twelve model pairs), confirming it reads model-internal knowledge state rather than input properties. Our code and datasets will be publicly released.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

FinChain: A Symbolic Benchmark for Verifiable Chain-of-Thought Financial Reasoning

Multi-step symbolic reasoning is essential for robust financial analysis; yet, current benchmarks largely overlook this capability. Existing datasets such as FinQA and ConvFinQA emphasize final numerical answers while neglecting the intermediate reasoning steps required for transparency and verification. To address this gap, we introduce FinChain, the first benchmark specifically designed for verifiable Chain-of-Thought evaluation in finance. FinChain spans 58 topics across 12 financial domains, each represented by parameterized symbolic templates with executable Python code that enable fully machine-verifiable reasoning and scalable, contamination-free data generation. To assess reasoning capacity, we propose CHAINEVAL, a dynamic alignment measure that jointly evaluates both the final-answer correctness and the step-level reasoning consistency. Our evaluation of 26 leading LLMs reveals that even frontier LLMs exhibit clear limitations in symbolic financial reasoning, while domain-adapted and math-enhanced fine-tuned models can substantially narrow this gap. Overall, FinChain exposes persistent weaknesses in multi-step financial reasoning and provides a foundation for developing trustworthy, interpretable, and verifiable financial AI. This project is available at https://github.com/mbzuai-nlp/finchain.git.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

FinCARDS: Card-Based Analyst Reranking for Financial Document Question Answering

Financial question answering (QA) over long corporate filings requires evidence to satisfy strict constraints on entities, financial metrics, fiscal periods, and numeric values. However, existing LLM-based rerankers primarily optimize semantic relevance, leading to unstable rankings and opaque decisions on long documents. We propose FinCards, a structured reranking framework that reframes financial evidence selection as constraint satisfaction under a finance-aware schema. FinCards represents filing chunks and questions using aligned schema fields (entities, metrics, periods, and numeric spans), enabling deterministic field-level matching. Evidence is selected via a multi-stage tournament reranking with stability-aware aggregation, producing auditable decision traces. Across two corporate filing QA benchmarks, FinCards substantially improves early-rank retrieval over both lexical and LLM-based reranking baselines, while reducing ranking variance, without requiring model fine-tuning or unpredictable inference budgets. Our code is available at https://github.com/XanderZhou2022/FINCARDS.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

SAHM: A Benchmark for Arabic Financial and Shari'ah-Compliant Reasoning

English financial NLP has advanced rapidly through benchmarks targeting earnings analysis, market sentiment, tabular reasoning, and financial question answering, yet Arabic financial NLP remains virtually nonexistent, despite 422 million speakers, $4.9 trillion in Gulf sovereign wealth, and a $4-5 trillion Islamic finance industry requiring specialized Shari'ah compliance over instruments like sukuk, murabaha, and takaful. We introduce Sahm, the first Arabic financial benchmark spanning seven tasks: AAOIFI standards QA, fatwa-based QA/MCQ, accounting and business exams, financial sentiment analysis, extractive summarization, and event-cause reasoning, comprising 14,380 expert-verified instances from authentic regulatory, juristic, and corporate sources. Evaluating 20 LLMs, we find Arabic fluency does not imply financial reasoning: models achieving 91% on recognition tasks drop sharply on generation, and event-cause reasoning exposes the widest performance gap (1.89-9.84/10). We release the benchmark and dataset to support trustworthy Arabic financial assistants.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Cultural Benchmarking of LLMs in Standard and Dialectal Arabic Dialogues

There is a significant gap in evaluating cultural reasoning in LLMs using conversational datasets that capture culturally rich and dialectal contexts. Most Arabic benchmarks focus on short text snippets in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), overlooking the cultural nuances that naturally arise in dialogues. To address this gap, we introduce ArabCulture-Dialogue, a culturally grounded conversational dataset covering 13 Arabic-speaking countries, in both MSA and each country's respective dialect, spanning 12 daily-life topics and 54 fine-grained subtopics. We utilize the dataset to form three benchmarking tasks: (i) multiple-choice cultural reasoning, (ii) machine translation between MSA and dialects, and (iii) dialect-steering generation. Our experiments indicate that the performance gap between MSA and Arabic dialects still exists, whereby the models perform worse on all three tasks in the dialectal setup, compared to the MSA one.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Is Human-Like Text Liked by Humans? Multilingual Human Detection and Preference Against AI

Prior studies have shown that distinguishing text generated by Large Language Models (LLMs) from human-written one is highly challenging for humans, and often no better than random guessing. To verify the generalizability of this finding across languages and domains, we perform an extensive case study to identify the upper bound of human detection accuracy. Across 16 datasets covering 9 languages and 9 domains, 19 annotators achieved an average detection accuracy of 87.6%, thus challenging previous conclusions. We find that major gaps between human and machine text lie in concreteness, cultural nuances, and diversity. Prompting by explicitly explaining the distinctions in the prompts can partially bridge the gaps in over 50% of the cases. However, we also find that humans do not always prefer human-written text, particularly when they cannot clearly identify its source. We release our dataset, the human labels, and the annotator metadata at https://github.com/xnlp-lab/HumanEval-MGT.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

RealFin: How Well Do LLMs Reason About Finance When Users Leave Things Unsaid?

Reliable financial reasoning requires knowing not only how to answer, but also when an answer cannot be justified. In real financial practice, problems often rely on implicit assumptions that are taken for granted rather than stated explicitly, causing problems to appear solvable while lacking enough information for a definite answer. We introduce REALFIN, a bilingual benchmark that evaluates financial reasoning by systematically removing essential premises from exam-style questions while keeping them linguistically plausible. Based on this, we evaluate models under three formulations that test answering, recognizing missing information, and rejecting unjustified options, and find consistent performance drops when key conditions are absent. General-purpose models tend to over-commit and guess, while most finance-specialized models fail to clearly identify missing premises. These results highlight a critical gap in current evaluations and show that reliable financial models must know when a question should not be answered.

q-fin.ST↗

arXiv2026

Same Claim, Different Judgment: Benchmarking Scenario-Induced Bias in Multilingual Financial Misinformation Detection

Large language models (LLMs) have been widely applied across various domains of finance. Since their training data are largely derived from human-authored corpora, LLMs may inherit a range of human biases. Behavioral biases can lead to instability and uncertainty in decision-making, particularly when processing financial information. However, existing research on LLM bias has mainly focused on direct questioning or simplified, general-purpose settings, with limited consideration of the complex real-world financial environments and high-risk, context-sensitive, multilingual financial misinformation detection tasks MFMD. In this work, we propose MFMDScen, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating behavioral biases of LLMs in MFMD across diverse economic scenarios. In collaboration with financial experts, we construct three types of complex financial scenarios: (i) role- and personality-based, (ii) role- and region-based, and (iii) role-based scenarios incorporating ethnicity and religious beliefs. We further develop a multilingual financial misinformation dataset covering English, Chinese, Greek, and Bengali. By integrating these scenarios with misinformation claims, MFMDScen enables a systematic evaluation of 22 mainstream LLMs. Our findings reveal that pronounced behavioral biases persist across both commercial and open-source models. This project is available at https://github.com/lzw108/FMD.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

FinCriticalED: A Visual Benchmark for Financial Fact-Level OCR

Recent progress in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) has substantially improved document understanding, yet strong optical character recognition (OCR) performance on surface metrics does not guarantee faithful preservation of decision-critical evidence. This limitation is especially consequential in financial documents, where small visual errors can induce discrete shifts in meaning. To study this gap, we introduce FinCriticalED (Financial Critical Error Detection), a fact-centric visual benchmark for evaluating whether OCR and vision-language systems preserve financially critical evidence beyond lexical similarity. FinCriticalED contains 859 real-world financial document pages with 9,481 expert-annotated facts spanning five critical field types: numeric, temporal, monetary unit, reporting entity, and financial concept. We formulate the task as structured OCR with fact-level verification, and develop a Deterministic-Rule-Guided LLM-as-Judge protocol to assess whether model outputs preserve annotated facts in context. We benchmark 13 systems spanning OCR pipelines, specialized OCR VLMs, open-source MLLMs, and proprietary MLLMs. Results reveal a clear gap between lexical accuracy and factual reliability, with numerical values and monetary units emerging as the most vulnerable fact types, and critical errors concentrating in visually complex, mixed-layout documents with distinct failure patterns across model families. Overall, FinCriticalED provides a rigorous benchmark for trustworthy financial OCR and a practical testbed for evidence fidelity in high-stakes multimodal document understanding. Benchmark and dataset details available at https://the-finai.github.io/FinCriticalED/

cs.CV↗

arXiv2026

Multi-Sourced, Multi-Agent Evidence Retrieval for Fact-Checking

Misinformation spreading over the Internet poses a significant threat to both societies and individuals, necessitating robust and scalable fact-checking that relies on retrieving accurate and trustworthy evidence. Previous methods rely on semantic and social-contextual patterns learned from training data, which limits their generalization to new data distributions. Recently, Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) based methods have been proposed to utilize the reasoning capability of LLMs with retrieved grounding evidence documents. However, these methods largely rely on textual similarity for evidence retrieval and struggle to retrieve evidence that captures multi-hop semantic relations within rich document contents. These limitations lead to overlooking subtle factual correlations between the evidence and the claims to be fact-checked during evidence retrieval, thus causing inaccurate veracity predictions. To address these issues, we propose WKGFC, which exploits authorized open knowledge graph as a core resource of evidence. LLM-enabled retrieval is designed to assess the claims and retrieve the most relevant knowledge subgraphs, forming structured evidence for fact verification. To augment the knowledge graph evidence, we retrieve web contents for completion. The above process is implemented as an automatic Markov Decision Process (MDP): A reasoning LLM agent decides what actions to take according to the current evidence and the claims. To adapt the MDP for fact-checking, we use prompt optimization to fine-tune the agentic LLM.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

A Parallel Cross-Lingual Benchmark for Multimodal Idiomaticity Understanding

Potentially idiomatic expressions (PIEs) construe meanings inherently tied to the everyday experience of a given language community. As such, they constitute an interesting challenge for assessing the linguistic (and to some extent cultural) capabilities of NLP systems. In this paper, we present XMPIE, a parallel multilingual and multimodal dataset of potentially idiomatic expressions. The dataset, containing 34 languages and over ten thousand items, allows comparative analyses of idiomatic patterns among language-specific realisations and preferences in order to gather insights about shared cultural aspects. This parallel dataset allows to evaluate model performance for a given PIE in different languages and whether idiomatic understanding in one language can be transferred to another. Moreover, the dataset supports the study of PIEs across textual and visual modalities, to measure to what extent PIE understanding in one modality transfers or implies in understanding in another modality (text vs. image). The data was created by language experts, with both textual and visual components crafted under multilingual guidelines, and each PIE is accompanied by five images representing a spectrum from idiomatic to literal meanings, including semantically related and random distractors. The result is a high-quality benchmark for evaluating multilingual and multimodal idiomatic language understanding.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

The CLEF-2026 FinMMEval Lab: Multilingual and Multimodal Evaluation of Financial AI Systems

We present the setup and the tasks of the FinMMEval Lab at CLEF 2026, which introduces the first multilingual and multimodal evaluation framework for financial Large Language Models (LLMs). While recent advances in financial natural language processing have enabled automated analysis of market reports, regulatory documents, and investor communications, existing benchmarks remain largely monolingual, text-only, and limited to narrow subtasks. FinMMEval 2026 addresses this gap by offering three interconnected tasks that span financial understanding, reasoning, and decision-making: Financial Exam Question Answering, Multilingual Financial Question Answering (PolyFiQA), and Financial Decision Making. Together, these tasks provide a comprehensive evaluation suite that measures models' ability to reason, generalize, and act across diverse languages and modalities. The lab aims to promote the development of robust, transparent, and globally inclusive financial AI systems, with datasets and evaluation resources publicly released to support reproducible research.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Can LLMs Automate Fact-Checking Article Writing?

Automatic fact-checking aims to support professional fact-checkers by offering tools that can help speed up manual fact-checking. Yet, existing frameworks fail to address the key step of producing output suitable for broader dissemination to the general public: while human fact-checkers communicate their findings through fact-checking articles, automated systems typically produce little or no justification for their assessments. Here, we aim to bridge this gap. In particular, we argue for the need to extend the typical automatic fact-checking pipeline with automatic generation of full fact-checking articles. We first identify key desiderata for such articles through a series of interviews with experts from leading fact-checking organizations. We then develop QRAFT, an LLM-based agentic framework that mimics the writing workflow of human fact-checkers. Finally, we assess the practical usefulness of QRAFT through human evaluations with professional fact-checkers. Our evaluation shows that while QRAFT outperforms several previously proposed text-generation approaches, it lags considerably behind expert-written articles. We hope that our work will enable further research in this new and important direction. The code for our implementation is available at https://github.com/mbzuai-nlp/qraft.git.

cs.CL↗