Yanbin Yin, Chuyu Xu, Liqin Ye, Jing Peng, Chao Zhang
Quarterly earnings forecasting requires an agent to connect financial evidence to the income-statement line items that produce a company's reported earnings. We introduce EPSBench, a benchmark for studying this ability across 149 firm-quarters from 86 US companies. Agents read a fixed collection of filings, earnings-call transcripts, and news, then estimate company-specific income-statement drivers with cited evidence. A shared accounting calculator converts these estimates into GAAP diluted earnings per share (EPS), providing a common basis for comparing forecast assumptions. We evaluate six models under a common harness, assessing point forecast error relative to date-matched analyst consensus and checking whether their prediction intervals achieve the stated coverage. Three models show no detectable paired difference in point forecast error from consensus, and three have higher error. Across all six models, nominal 80% intervals contain reported EPS in only 37--70% of runs that return an interval, and most misses fall above the upper bound because the forecasts run low. The driver records trace most of the error gap between models to operating-income estimates.
Forecasting requires large language model (LLM) agents to gather evolving evidence, revise their beliefs, and make calibrated predictions over time. Yet evaluating and improving these capabilities is challenging because real-world events unfold continuously and outcomes may take months to resolve. We introduce Forecast-Dojo, a replayable environment that reconstructs resolved prediction-market events as sequences of dated forecasting steps, enabling reproducible evaluation, longitudinal analysis, and training from agent interactions. It comprises 1,568 Polymarket events split temporally into training and evaluation sets, alongside 18.8 million dated news articles. Across 12 models, research tools consistently improve forecasting performance, and greater capture of new evidence is associated with larger improvements over time. Nevertheless, all models trail historical market forecasts, while carrying a belief notebook across dates reduces research costs without consistently improving forecast quality. We supervise fine-tuned Qwen3-30B-A3B-Thinking-2507 on collected trajectories from Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507 to demonstrate the environment's training utility. The student's accuracy is improved from 34.8% to 42.8% on the evaluation set.
Forecasting an unresolved event requires finding relevant evidence and deciding how strongly it supports each outcome. Yet outcome-based training of Large Language Model (LLM) forecasters often begins with preassembled evidence at a single prediction date, leaving evidence acquisition outside the learning loop. We introduce AlphaBet, an agentic reinforcement learning (RL) framework that trains a single LLM policy to search, reason, and report probabilities across multiple pre-resolution dates. Each dated forecast is scored by a proper scoring rule against the eventual outcome, allowing one resolved event to supervise decisions under different information states. We decompose forecasting regret into an evidence-acquisition gap and a probability-reporting gap, and show that Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO)'s standard-deviation normalization can distort the reporting target under multi-class proper scores. On GLM-4.5-Air, AlphaBet reduces the Brier score from 0.731 to 0.626 on Forecast-Dojo and from 0.612 to 0.528 on FutureX. Controlled ablations attribute these gains to multi-date training and show that they come from improvements in both information acquisition and probability reporting. Our empirical results validate that GRPO's std normalization degrades proper-scoring-rule performance while leaving top-outcome accuracy largely unchanged.