pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.09544 · v2 · pith:HSQP5ETKnew · submitted 2025-09-11 · 💻 cs.CL

MetaGraph: A Large-Scale Meta-Analysis of GenAI in Financial NLP (2022-2025)

Paolo Pedinotti , Peter Baumann , Nathan Jessurun , Leslie Barrett , Enrico Santus This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 17:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CL
keywords MetaGraphGenAIfinancial NLPknowledge graphsmeta-analysistrend analysisLLM extractionontology-guided
0
0 comments X p. Extension
pith:HSQP5ETK Add to your LaTeX paper What is a Pith Number? 
\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{HSQP5ETK}

Prints a linked pith:HSQP5ETK badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more

The pith

MetaGraph uses ontology-guided LLM extraction to turn 681 papers into a knowledge graph that maps three phases of GenAI development in financial NLP from 2022 to 2025.

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

The paper presents MetaGraph as a method to extract typed knowledge graphs from large collections of scientific papers through ontology-guided large language model processing. Applied to the full set of 681 papers on generative AI in finance, the resulting graph shows an initial burst of new tasks and datasets, followed by greater attention to limitations and risks, and then a turn toward modular system designs such as retrieval-augmented setups. A reader would care because manual narrative reviews cannot scale with the speed of this research area, while the structured extraction offers a repeatable way to track changes over time. The authors also release the extracted resource so others can reproduce or extend the analysis.

Core claim

MetaGraph is a methodology for extracting typed knowledge graphs from scientific corpora using ontology-guided LLM extraction to enable structured, large-scale trend analysis. Applied to 681 papers on GenAI in Finance (2022-2025), MetaGraph reveals three phases: early LLM-driven expansion of tasks and datasets, growing emphasis on limitations and risk, and a shift toward modular, system-oriented methods (e.g., retrieval-augmented designs).

What carries the argument

Ontology-guided LLM extraction that builds typed knowledge graphs from paper text to support structured meta-analysis of trends and relations.

If this is right

  • The field can now be monitored with reproducible, graph-based snapshots instead of ad-hoc narrative surveys.
  • Researchers gain access to a released resource of extracted entities and relations for further study.
  • Future papers can be added incrementally to track whether the shift toward modular designs continues.
  • The three-phase pattern supplies a baseline for comparing GenAI progress in finance against other application domains.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same extraction approach could be applied to other fast-moving technical literatures such as medical AI or robotics to detect comparable phase shifts.
  • If the phases prove stable, they might guide funding or regulatory priorities by highlighting when risk discussions overtake capability expansion.
  • Periodic re-runs of the pipeline on new papers could create an early-warning system for emerging methodological trends.

Load-bearing premise

The ontology-guided LLM extraction process accurately and consistently identifies the relevant entities, relations, and trends across the 681 papers without substantial errors, omissions, or biases introduced by the model or ontology choices.

What would settle it

Running the same extraction pipeline on the identical 681 papers with a different large language model or a modified ontology that produces markedly different phases or trend patterns would show the method is not reliable.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.09544 by Enrico Santus, Leslie Barrett, Nathan Jessurun, Paolo Pedinotti, Peter Baumann.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Example of paper subgraph. NLP. We introduce MetaGraph, a method￾ology for automated Knowledge Graph (KG) construction from research papers using LLMs, to address this gap. MetaGraph involves the manual definition of an ontology of information that is relevant to tracking research evolution (such as papers metadata, motivations and lim￾itations, tasks approached, techniques, models, and datasets), and the … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Increasing Focus on Financial QA. Task [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Reported limitations by period. Syn [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: New datasets by period. 4.1 A Growing Awareness LLMs have lowered key barriers to both adoption and data processing. On one hand, they remove data format constraints—enabling the processing of unstructured data. On the other, they support synthetic data genera￾tion, helping mitigate challenges such as cost, scarcity, and domain bias ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Share of papers using open-source models [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Technique evolution over time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: LLMs’ usage distribution over time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Open-source LLMs’ sizes over time. and computed the relative proportion of finan￾cial QA instances, open models instances, new datasets (datasets created after 2022), and cre￾ated datasets (the dataset has been created by the same authors who are using it). Industry moved faster—dominating financial QA and driving dataset innovation to stay competitive. Academia responded more cautiously, focusing on estab… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Latest trends in financial NLP lens on the field’s changing priorities and a reusable toolkit for data-driven meta-analysis. 6 Limitations • Our approach relies on a manually defined ontology, which introduces an inductive bias in how entities and relations are cate￾gorized. While this provides structure and interpretability, it may also limit flexibil￾ity and overlook alternative or emergent conceptualiz… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Geography of Financial NLP. The intensity of colors indicates the frequency of contributions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Structure of the graph generated by applying MetaGraph on financial NLP papers. Nodes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: illustrates the changing propor￾tions of datasets explicitly referencing prior literature over time. It illustrates how the proportion of datasets that explicitly reference previous literature has changed over time, relative to all datasets used in published studies. The trend suggests a clear shift in data reuse practices: following an initial phase characterized by widespread creation of new datasets, r… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Attitude toward LLMs have evolved over time. E References of Cited Approaches [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Financial NLP has evolved rapidly since late 2022, outpacing narrative surveys. We introduce MetaGraph, a methodology for extracting typed knowledge graphs from scientific corpora using ontology-guided LLM extraction to enable structured, large-scale trend analysis. Applied to 681 papers on GenAI in Finance (2022-2025), MetaGraph reveals three phases: early LLM-driven expansion of tasks and datasets, growing emphasis on limitations and risk, and a shift toward modular, system-oriented methods (e.g., retrieval-augmented designs). We release the resulting resource and artifacts to support reproducible meta-analysis and future monitoring of the field.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces MetaGraph, a methodology for extracting typed knowledge graphs from scientific corpora using ontology-guided LLM extraction to enable structured, large-scale trend analysis. Applied to 681 papers on GenAI in Finance (2022-2025), it reveals three phases: early LLM-driven expansion of tasks and datasets, growing emphasis on limitations and risk, and a shift toward modular, system-oriented methods (e.g., retrieval-augmented designs). The resulting resource and artifacts are released to support reproducible meta-analysis.

Significance. If the extraction process is shown to be reliable, MetaGraph provides a scalable framework for meta-analysis in rapidly evolving fields, moving beyond narrative surveys. The public release of the knowledge graph and artifacts is a clear strength that enables reproducibility and ongoing field monitoring.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methodology] The central claims about the three observed phases rest on the accuracy of the ontology-guided LLM extraction from the 681 papers. The manuscript provides no quantitative validation of this step, such as precision/recall on a held-out sample, inter-annotator agreement with experts, or error analysis stratified by year (see Methodology section on the extraction pipeline). Without these, it is impossible to rule out systematic biases from the LLM or ontology choices influencing the reported trends.
  2. [Results] The derivation of the three phases from the extracted graph lacks detail on the quantitative process used (e.g., how changes in entity/relation frequencies or modular method mentions were aggregated over time to identify phase boundaries). This makes the narrative in the Results section difficult to assess for robustness.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from briefly noting the corpus size (681 papers) and the public release of the resource to better convey the work's scope.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the knowledge graph visualizations should include more detail on node/edge types and temporal encoding to improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments on our work. We address the major comments point-by-point below, indicating the revisions we plan to make to improve the manuscript's methodological transparency and robustness.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methodology] The central claims about the three observed phases rest on the accuracy of the ontology-guided LLM extraction from the 681 papers. The manuscript provides no quantitative validation of this step, such as precision/recall on a held-out sample, inter-annotator agreement with experts, or error analysis stratified by year (see Methodology section on the extraction pipeline). Without these, it is impossible to rule out systematic biases from the LLM or ontology choices influencing the reported trends.

    Authors: We agree that demonstrating the reliability of the extraction process is essential to support the validity of the identified phases. While the original submission emphasized the use of a carefully designed ontology to guide the LLM and reduce hallucinations, we did not include quantitative metrics. In the revised manuscript, we will add a dedicated validation subsection. This will report results from a held-out sample of 100 papers where we compute precision and recall by comparing LLM extractions to expert annotations, along with inter-annotator agreement scores. We will also provide a year-stratified error analysis to assess potential temporal biases. These additions will directly address concerns about systematic biases. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] The derivation of the three phases from the extracted graph lacks detail on the quantitative process used (e.g., how changes in entity/relation frequencies or modular method mentions were aggregated over time to identify phase boundaries). This makes the narrative in the Results section difficult to assess for robustness.

    Authors: We acknowledge that greater detail on the phase identification process would enhance the transparency and allow for better evaluation of the results. The phases were derived by analyzing temporal trends in the frequencies of key entities and relations in the knowledge graph, such as increases in 'limitation' and 'risk' mentions, and the emergence of modular architectures. In the revision, we will expand the Results section to describe the quantitative aggregation method, including the use of time-binned frequency plots, normalization procedures, and the specific criteria (e.g., inflection points in multiple indicators) used to delineate the phase boundaries. Supporting figures and a step-by-step description will be added to facilitate reproducibility. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; trends are outputs from external corpus processing

full rationale

The derivation applies the MetaGraph extraction methodology to an independent corpus of 681 papers and reports the resulting three-phase narrative as an empirical finding. No equations, parameters, or premises reduce by construction to the target trends; the ontology-guided LLM step is a processing tool whose outputs are not presupposed in its definition, and no self-citation or fitted-input patterns are present in the provided description.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the reliability of the LLM extraction step and the completeness of the chosen ontology; no free parameters or invented entities are mentioned in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption An ontology can be defined that comprehensively captures the key concepts, tasks, methods, and risks relevant to GenAI in financial NLP.
    The extraction process is guided by this ontology; if it misses important categories the resulting graph and phase analysis would be incomplete.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5641 in / 1366 out tokens · 55720 ms · 2026-05-18T17:38:47.030742+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages · 8 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    online" 'onlinestring :=

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter edition editor eid eprint eprinttype howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year doi pubmed url lastchecked label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block STRING...

    work page

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Hamed Babaei Giglou, Jennifer D'Souza, and S \"o ren Auer. 2023. Llms4ol: Large language models for ontology learning. In The Semantic Web -- ISWC 2023, pages 408--427, Cham. Springer Nature Switzerland

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Jinze Bai, Shuai Bai, Yunfei Chu, Zeyu Cui, Kai Dang, Xiaodong Deng, Yang Fan, Wenbin Ge, Yu Han, Fei Huang, Binyuan Hui, Luo Ji, Mei Li, Junyang Lin, Runji Lin, Dayiheng Liu, Gao Liu, Chengqiang Lu, Keming Lu, and 29 others. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.16609 Qwen technical report . Preprint, arXiv:2309.16609

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Gagan Bhatia, El Moatez Billah Nagoudi, Hasan Cavusoglu, and Muhammad Abdul-Mageed. 2024. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.774 F in T ral: A family of GPT -4 level multimodal financial large language models . In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, pages 13064--13087, Bangkok, Thailand. Association for Computat...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.774 2024

  6. [6]

    Salvatore Carta, Alessandro Giuliani, Leonardo Piano, Alessandro Sebastian Podda, Livio Pompianu, and Sandro Gabriele Tiddia. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.01128 Iterative zero-shot llm prompting for knowledge graph construction . Preprint, arXiv:2307.01128

    work page arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Chung-Chi Chen, Hiroya Takamura, Ichiro Kobayashi, and Yusuke Miyao. 2024 a . https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.00354 Hierarchical organization simulacra in the investment sector . Preprint, arXiv:2410.00354

    work page arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Wei Chen, Qiushi Wang, Zefei Long, Xianyin Zhang, Zhongtian Lu, Bingxuan Li, Siyuan Wang, Jiarong Xu, Xiang Bai, Xuanjing Huang, and Zhongyu Wei. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.15205 Disc-finllm: A chinese financial large language model based on multiple experts fine-tuning . Preprint, arXiv:2310.15205

    work page arXiv 2023

  9. [9]

    Yuemin Chen, Feifan Wu, Jingwei Wang, Hao Qian, Ziqi Liu, Zhiqiang Zhang, Jun Zhou, and Meng Wang. 2024 b . https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-industry.90 Knowledge-augmented financial market analysis and report generation . In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Industry Track, pages 1207--1217, Mia...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-industry.90 2024

  10. [10]

    Zhiyu Chen, Wenhu Chen, Charese Smiley, Sameena Shah, Iana Borova, Dylan Langdon, Reema Moussa, Matt Beane, Ting-Hao Huang, Bryan Routledge, and William Yang Wang. 2021. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.300 F in QA : A dataset of numerical reasoning over financial data . In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Lang...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.300 2021

  11. [11]

    Zhiyu Chen, Shiyang Li, Charese Smiley, Zhiqiang Ma, Sameena Shah, and William Yang Wang. 2022. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.421 C onv F in QA : Exploring the chain of numerical reasoning in conversational finance question answering . In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 6279--6292...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.421 2022

  12. [12]

    Nicole Cho, Nishan Srishankar, Lucas Cecchi, and William Watson. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1145/3677052.3698597 Fishnet: Financial intelligence from sub-querying, harmonizing, neural-conditioning, expert swarms, and task planning . In Proceedings of the 5th ACM International Conference on AI in Finance, ICAIF '24, page 591–599, New York, NY, USA. Associati...

    work page doi:10.1145/3677052.3698597 2024

  13. [13]

    Karakaplan

    Raul Salles de Padua, Imran Qureshi, and Mustafa U. Karakaplan. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.13617 Gpt-3 models are few-shot financial reasoners . Preprint, arXiv:2307.13617

    work page arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    DeepSeek-AI, Daya Guo, Dejian Yang, Haowei Zhang, Junxiao Song, Ruoyu Zhang, Runxin Xu, Qihao Zhu, Shirong Ma, Peiyi Wang, Xiao Bi, Xiaokang Zhang, Xingkai Yu, Yu Wu, Z. F. Wu, Zhibin Gou, Zhihong Shao, Zhuoshu Li, Ziyi Gao, and 181 others. 2025. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12948 Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement lea...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Xiang Deng, Vasilisa Bashlovkina, Feng Han, Simon Baumgartner, and Michael Bendersky. 2022. https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.11311 What do llms know about financial markets? a case study on reddit market sentiment analysis . Preprint, arXiv:2212.11311

    work page arXiv 2022

  16. [16]

    Kelvin Du, Yazhi Zhao, Rui Mao, Frank Xing, and Erik Cambria. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2024.102755 Natural language processing in finance: A survey . Information Fusion, 115:102755

    work page doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2024.102755 2025

  17. [17]

    Darren Edge, Ha Trinh, Newman Cheng, Joshua Bradley, Alex Chao, Apurva Mody, Steven Truitt, Dasha Metropolitansky, Robert Osazuwa Ness, and Jonathan Larson. 2025. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.16130 From local to global: A graph rag approach to query-focused summarization . Preprint, arXiv:2404.16130

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Sorouralsadat Fatemi and Yuheng Hu. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1145/3677052.3698686 Enhancing financial question answering with a multi-agent reflection framework . In Proceedings of the 5th ACM International Conference on AI in Finance, ICAIF ’24, page 530–537. ACM

    work page doi:10.1145/3677052.3698686 2024

  19. [19]

    George Fatouros, Kostas Metaxas, John Soldatos, and Dimosthenis Kyriazis. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-024-10613-4 Can large language models beat wall street? evaluating gpt-4’s impact on financial decision-making with marketsenseai . Neural Computing and Applications

    work page doi:10.1007/s00521-024-10613-4 2024

  20. [20]

    Maurice Funk, Simon Hosemann, Jean Christoph Jung, and Carsten Lutz. 2023. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3577/paper16.pdf Towards ontology construction with language models . In Joint proceedings of the 1st workshop on Knowledge Base Construction from Pre-Trained Language Models (KBC-LM) and the 2nd challenge on Language Models for Knowledge Base Construction (...

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Yunfan Gao, Yun Xiong, Xinyu Gao, Kangxiang Jia, Jinliu Pan, Yuxi Bi, Yi Dai, Jiawei Sun, Qianyu Guo, Meng Wang, and Haofen Wang. 2023. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:266359151 Retrieval-augmented generation for large language models: A survey . ArXiv, abs/2312.10997

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  22. [22]

    Jiayu Guo, Yu Guo, Martha Li, and Songtao Tan. 2025. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.06211 Flame: Financial large-language model assessment and metrics evaluation . Preprint, arXiv:2501.06211

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Yue Guo and Yi Yang. 2024. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.58 E con NLI : Evaluating large language models on economics reasoning . In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, pages 982--994, Bangkok, Thailand. Association for Computational Linguistics

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.58 2024

  24. [24]

    Xuewen Han, Neng Wang, Shangkun Che, Hongyang Yang, Kunpeng Zhang, and Sean Xin Xu. 2024. https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2411.04788.html Enhancing Investment Analysis: Optimizing AI-Agent Collaboration in Financial Research . Papers 2411.04788, arXiv.org

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Pranab Islam, Anand Kannappan, Douwe Kiela, Rebecca Qian, Nino Scherrer, and Bertie Vidgen. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.11944 Financebench: A new benchmark for financial question answering . Preprint, arXiv:2311.11944

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Simerjot Kaur, Charese Smiley, Akshat Gupta, Joy Sain, Dongsheng Wang, Suchetha Siddagangappa, Toyin Aguda, and Sameena Shah. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1145/3539618.3591911 Refind: Relation extraction financial dataset . In Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, SIGIR '23, page 3054–...

    work page doi:10.1145/3539618.3591911 2023

  27. [27]

    Rik Koncel-Kedziorski, Michael Krumdick, Viet Lai, Varshini Reddy, Charles Lovering, and Chris Tanner. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.06602 Bizbench: A quantitative reasoning benchmark for business and finance . Preprint, arXiv:2311.06602

    work page arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Michael Krumdick, Rik Koncel-Kedziorski, Viet Dac Lai, Varshini Reddy, Charles Lovering, and Chris Tanner. 2024. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.452 B iz B ench: A quantitative reasoning benchmark for business and finance . In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 8...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.452 2024

  29. [29]

    Viet Dac Lai, Michael Krumdick, Charles Lovering, Varshini Reddy, Craig Schmidt, and Chris Tanner. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.14394 Sec-qa: A systematic evaluation corpus for financial qa . Preprint, arXiv:2406.14394

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Jiangtong Li, Yuxuan Bian, Guoxuan Wang, Yang Lei, Dawei Cheng, Zhijun Ding, and Changjun Jiang. 2023 a . https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.10654 Cfgpt: Chinese financial assistant with large language model . Preprint, arXiv:2309.10654

    work page arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    Xiang Li, Zhenyu Li, Chen Shi, Yong Xu, Qing Du, Mingkui Tan, and Jun Huang. 2024 a . https://aclanthology.org/2024.lrec-main.69/ A lpha F in: Benchmarking financial analysis with retrieval-augmented stock-chain framework . In Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-COLIN...

    work page 2024

  32. [32]

    Yinheng Li, Shaofei Wang, Han Ding, and Hang Chen. 2023 b . https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.10723 Large language models in finance: A survey . arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.10723. Accepted at the 4th ACM International Conference on AI in Finance (ICAIF-23)

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.10723 2023

  33. [33]

    Yuan Li, Bingqiao Luo, Qian Wang, Nuo Chen, Xu Liu, and Bingsheng He. 2024 b . https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.63 C rypto T rade: A reflective LLM -based agent to guide zero-shot cryptocurrency trading . In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1094--1106, Miami, Florida, USA. Association...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.63 2024

  34. [34]

    Jiaxin Liu, Yi Yang, and Kar Yan Tam. 2025 a . https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.06646 Evaluating and aligning human economic risk preferences in llms . Preprint, arXiv:2503.06646

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [36]

    Xiao-Yang Liu, Guoxuan Wang, Hongyang Yang, and Daochen Zha. 2023 b . https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2307.10485.html FinGPT: Democratizing Internet-scale Data for Financial Large Language Models . Papers 2307.10485, arXiv.org

    work page arXiv 2023

  36. [37]

    Zhaowei Liu, Xin Guo, Fangqi Lou, Lingfeng Zeng, Jinyi Niu, Zixuan Wang, Jiajie Xu, Weige Cai, Ziwei Yang, Xueqian Zhao, Chao Li, Sheng Xu, Dezhi Chen, Yun Chen, Zuo Bai, and Liwen Zhang. 2025 b . https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.16252 Fin-r1: A large language model for financial reasoning through reinforcement learning . Preprint, arXiv:2503.16252

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [38]

    Zhiwei Liu, Xin Zhang, Kailai Yang, Qianqian Xie, Jimin Huang, and Sophia Ananiadou. 2025 c . https://doi.org/10.1145/3701716.3715599 Fmdllama: Financial misinformation detection based on large language models . In Companion Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2025, WWW '25, page 1153–1157, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery

    work page doi:10.1145/3701716.3715599 2025

  38. [39]

    Dakuan Lu, Hengkui Wu, Jiaqing Liang, Yipei Xu, Qianyu He, Yipeng Geng, Mengkun Han, Yingsi Xin, and Yanghua Xiao. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.09432 Bbt-fin: Comprehensive construction of chinese financial domain pre-trained language model, corpus and benchmark . Preprint, arXiv:2302.09432

    work page arXiv 2023

  39. [40]

    Macedo Maia, Siegfried Handschuh, Andr\' e Freitas, Brian Davis, Ross McDermott, Manel Zarrouk, and Alexandra Balahur. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1145/3184558.3192301 Www'18 open challenge: Financial opinion mining and question answering . In Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018, WWW '18, page 1941–1942, Republic and Canton of Geneva, CHE. I...

    work page doi:10.1145/3184558.3192301 2018

  40. [41]

    Pekka Malo, Ankur Sinha, Pekka Korhonen, Jyrki Wallenius, and Pyry Takala. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23062 Good debt or bad debt: Detecting semantic orientations in economic texts . Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(4):782--796

    work page doi:10.1002/asi.23062 2014

  41. [42]

    A survey of large language models for financial applications: Progress, prospects and challenges.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.11903,

    Yuqi Nie, Yaxuan Kong, Xiaowen Dong, John M. Mulvey, H. Vincent Poor, Qingsong Wen, and Stefan Zohren. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.11903 A survey of large language models for financial applications: Progress, prospects and challenges . Preprint, arXiv:2406.11903

    work page arXiv 2024

  42. [43]

    Sohini Roychowdhury. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1145/3616855.3635737 Journey of hallucination-minimized generative ai solutions for financial decision makers . In Proceedings of the 17th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, WSDM '24, page 1180–1181, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery

    work page doi:10.1145/3616855.3635737 2024

  43. [44]

    Manish Sanwal. 2025. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.18645 Layered chain-of-thought prompting for multi-agent llm systems: A comprehensive approach to explainable large language models . Preprint, arXiv:2501.18645

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [45]

    Sander Schulhoff, Michael Ilie, Nishant Balepur, Konstantine Kahadze, Amanda Liu, Chenglei Si, Yinheng Li, Aayush Gupta, HyoJung Han, Sevien Schulhoff, Pranav Sandeep Dulepet, Saurav Vidyadhara, Dayeon Ki, Sweta Agrawal, Chau Pham, Gerson Kroiz, Feileen Li, Hudson Tao, Ashay Srivastava, and 12 others. 2025. https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.06608 The prompt repo...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  45. [46]

    Raj Shah, Kunal Chawla, Dheeraj Eidnani, Agam Shah, Wendi Du, Sudheer Chava, Natraj Raman, Charese Smiley, Jiaao Chen, and Diyi Yang. 2022. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.148 When FLUE meets FLANG : Benchmarks and large pretrained language model for financial domain . In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Langu...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.148 2022

  46. [47]

    Jiashuo Sun, Hang Zhang, Chen Lin, Xiangdong Su, Yeyun Gong, and Jian Guo. 2024. https://aclanthology.org/2024.lrec-main.122/ APOLLO : An optimized training approach for long-form numerical reasoning . In Proceedings of the 2024 Joint International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-COLING 2024), pages 1370--1...

    work page 2024

  47. [48]

    Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix, Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, Aurelien Rodriguez, Armand Joulin, Edouard Grave, and Guillaume Lample. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.13971 Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models . Preprint, arXiv:2302.13971

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  48. [49]

    Shijie Wu, Ozan Irsoy, Steven Lu, Vadim Dabravolski, Mark Dredze, Sebastian Gehrmann, Prabhanjan Kambadur, David Rosenberg, and Gideon Mann. 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.17564 Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance . Preprint, arXiv:2303.17564

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  49. [50]

    Kwon, Makoto Onizuka, Shaojie Tang, and Chuan Xiao

    Zengqing Wu, Run Peng, Shuyuan Zheng, Qianying Liu, Xu Han, Brian I. Kwon, Makoto Onizuka, Shaojie Tang, and Chuan Xiao. 2024. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.findings-emnlp.297 Shall we team up: Exploring spontaneous cooperation of competing LLM agents . In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024, pages 5163--5186, Miami, F...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-emnlp.297 2024

  50. [51]

    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, and 15 others. 2024. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2024/file/adb1d9fa8be4576d28703b396b82ba1b-...

    work page 2024

  51. [52]

    Qianqian Xie, Weiguang Han, Yanzhao Lai, Min Peng, and Jimin Huang. 2023 a . https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05351 The wall street neophyte: A zero-shot analysis of chatgpt over multimodal stock movement prediction challenges . Preprint, arXiv:2304.05351

    work page arXiv 2023

  52. [53]

    Qianqian Xie, Weiguang Han, Xiao Zhang, Yanzhao Lai, Min Peng, Alejandro Lopez-Lira, and Jimin Huang. 2023 b . Pixiu: a large language model, instruction data and evaluation benchmark for finance. In Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS '23, Red Hook, NY, USA. Curran Associates Inc

    work page 2023

  53. [54]

    Xing, Erik Cambria, and Roy E

    Frank Z. Xing, Erik Cambria, and Roy E. Welsch. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-017-9588-9 Natural language based financial forecasting: a survey . Artificial Intelligence Review, 50(1):49--73

    work page doi:10.1007/s10462-017-9588-9 2018

  54. [55]

    Siqiao Xue, Fan Zhou, Yi Xu, Ming Jin, Qingsong Wen, Hongyan Hao, Qingyang Dai, Caigao Jiang, Hongyu Zhao, Shuo Xie, Jianshan He, James Zhang, and Hongyuan Mei. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.05361 Weaverbird: Empowering financial decision-making with large language model, knowledge base, and search engine . Preprint, arXiv:2308.05361

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [56]

    Hongyang Yang, Xiao-Yang Liu, and Christina Dan Wang. 2023 a . https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.06031 Fingpt: Open-source financial large language models . Preprint, arXiv:2306.06031

    work page arXiv 2023

  56. [57]

    Hongyang Yang, Boyu Zhang, Neng Wang, Cheng Guo, Xiaoli Zhang, Likun Lin, Junlin Wang, Tianyu Zhou, Mao Guan, Runjia Zhang, and Christina Dan Wang. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14767 Finrobot: An open-source ai agent platform for financial applications using large language models . Preprint, arXiv:2405.14767

    work page arXiv 2024

  57. [58]

    Yi Yang, Yixuan Tang, and Kar Yan Tam. 2023 b . https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.13064 Investlm: A large language model for investment using financial domain instruction tuning . Preprint, arXiv:2309.13064

    work page arXiv 2023

  58. [59]

    Antonio Jimeno Yepes, Yao You, Jan Milczek, Sebastian Laverde, and Renyu Li. 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.05131 Financial report chunking for effective retrieval augmented generation . Preprint, arXiv:2402.05131

    work page arXiv 2024

  59. [60]

    Xinli Yu, Zheng Chen, and Yanbin Lu. 2023. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-industry.69 Harnessing LLM s for temporal data - a study on explainable financial time series forecasting . In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Industry Track, pages 739--753, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-industry.69 2023

  60. [61]

    Suchow, Zhenyu Cui, Rong Liu, Zhaozhuo Xu, Denghui Zhang, Koduvayur Subbalakshmi, Guojun Xiong, Yueru He, Jimin Huang, Dong Li, and Qianqian Xie

    Yangyang Yu, Zhiyuan Yao, Haohang Li, Zhiyang Deng, Yuechen Jiang, Yupeng Cao, Zhi Chen, Jordan W. Suchow, Zhenyu Cui, Rong Liu, Zhaozhuo Xu, Denghui Zhang, Koduvayur Subbalakshmi, Guojun Xiong, Yueru He, Jimin Huang, Dong Li, and Qianqian Xie. 2024. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2024/file/f7ae4fe91d96f50abc2211f09b6a7e49-Paper-Conferen...

    work page 2024

  61. [62]

    Alexandros Zeakis, George Papadakis, Dimitrios Skoutas, and Manolis Koubarakis. 2023. https://doi.org/10.14778/3598581.3598594 Pre-trained embeddings for entity resolution: An experimental analysis . Proc. VLDB Endow., 16(9):2225–2238

    work page doi:10.14778/3598581.3598594 2023

  62. [63]

    Boyu Zhang, Hongyang Yang, Tianyu Zhou, Muhammad Ali Babar, and Xiao-Yang Liu. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1145/3604237.3626866 Enhancing financial sentiment analysis via retrieval augmented large language models . In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on AI in Finance, ICAIF '23, page 349–356, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing...

    work page doi:10.1145/3604237.3626866 2023

  63. [64]

    Yiyun Zhao, Prateek Singh, Hanoz Bhathena, Bernardo Ramos, Aviral Joshi, Swaroop Gadiyaram, and Saket Sharma. 2024. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-industry.23 Optimizing LLM based retrieval augmented generation pipelines in the financial domain . In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computation...

    work page doi:10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-industry.23 2024