Answering questions within business and finance requires reasoning, precision, and a wide-breadth of technical knowledge. Together, these requirements make this domain difficult for large language models (LLMs). We introduce BizBench, a benchmark for evaluating models’ ability to reason about realistic financial problems. BizBench comprises eight quantitative reasoning tasks, focusing on question-answering (QA) over financial data via program synthesis. We include three financially-themed code-generation tasks from newly collected and augmented QA data. Additionally, we isolate the reasoning capabilities required for financial QA: reading comprehension of financial text and tables for extracting intermediate values, and understanding financial concepts and formulas needed to calculate complex solutions. Collectively, these tasks evaluate a model’s financial background knowledge, ability to parse financial documents, and capacity to solve problems with code. We conduct an in-depth evaluation of open-source and commercial LLMs, comparing and contrasting the behavior of code-focused and language-focused models. We demonstrate that the current bottleneck in performance is due to LLMs’ limited business and financial understanding, highlighting the value of a challenging benchmark for quantitative reasoning within this domain.

For large language models (LLMs) to be effective in the financial domain – where each decision can have a significant impact – it is necessary to investigate realistic tasks and data. Financial professionals often interact with documents spanning hundreds of pages, but most financial research datasets only deal with short excerpts from these documents. To address this, we introduce a long-document financial QA task. We augment 7,437 questions from the existing FinQA dataset with full-document context, extending the average context length from under 700 words in FinQA to 123k words in DocFinQA. We conduct extensive experiments over retrieval-based QA pipelines and long-context language models. Based on our experiments, DocFinQA proves a significant challenge for even state-of-the-art systems. We also provide a case study on a subset of the longest documents in DocFinQA and find that models particularly struggle with these documents. Addressing these challenges may have a wide-reaching impact across applications where specificity and long-range contexts are critical, like gene sequences and legal document contract analysis. DocFinQA dataset is publicly accessible.

While subword tokenizers such as BPE and WordPiece are typically used to build vocabularies for NLP models, the method of decoding text into a sequence of tokens from these vocabularies is often left unspecified, or ill-suited to the method in which they were constructed. We provide a controlled analysis of seven tokenizer inference methods across four different algorithms and three vocabulary sizes, performed on a novel intrinsic evaluation suite we curated for English, combining measures rooted in morphology, cognition, and information theory. We show that for the most commonly used tokenizers, greedy inference performs surprisingly well; and that SaGe, a recently-introduced contextually-informed tokenizer, outperforms all others on morphological alignment.

Event coreference models cluster event mentions pertaining to the same real-world event. Recent models rely on contextualized representations to recognize coreference among lexically or contextually similar mentions. However, models typically fail to leverage commonsense inferences, which is particularly limiting for resolving lexically-divergent mentions. We propose a model that extends event mentions with temporal commonsense inferences. Given a complex sentence with multiple events, e.g., “the man killed his wife and got arrested”, with the target event “arrested”, our model generates plausible events that happen before the target event – such as “the police arrived”, and after it, such as “he was sentenced”. We show that incorporating such inferences into an existing event coreference model improves its performance, and we analyze the coreferences in which such temporal knowledge is required.

Labeled data for the task of Coreference Resolution is a scarce resource, requiring significant human effort. While state-of-the-art coreference models rely on such data, we propose an approach that leverages an end-to-end neural model in settings where labeled data is unavailable. Specifically, using weak supervision, we transfer the linguistic knowledge encoded by Stanford?s rule-based coreference system to the end-to-end model, which jointly learns rich, contextualized span representations and coreference chains. Our experiments on the English OntoNotes corpus demonstrate that our approach effectively benefits from the noisy coreference supervision, producing an improvement over Stanford?s rule-based system (+3.7 F1) and outperforming the previous best unsupervised model (+0.9 F1). Additionally, we validate the efficacy of our method on two other datasets: PreCo and Litbank (+2.5 and +5 F1 on Stanford’s system, respectively).

Coreference resolution – which is a crucial task for understanding discourse and language at large – has yet to witness widespread benefits from large language models (LLMs). Moreover, coreference resolution systems largely rely on supervised labels, which are highly expensive and difficult to annotate, thus making it ripe for prompt engineering. In this paper, we introduce a QA-based prompt-engineering method and discern generative, pre-trained LLMs’ abilities and limitations toward the task of coreference resolution. Our experiments show that GPT-2 and GPT-Neo can return valid answers, but that their capabilities to identify coreferent mentions are limited and prompt-sensitive, leading to inconsistent results.

Automatic fake news detection models are ostensibly based on logic, where the truth of a claim made in a headline can be determined by supporting or refuting evidence found in a resulting web query. These models are believed to be reasoning in some way; however, it has been shown that these same results, or better, can be achieved without considering the claim at all – only the evidence. This implies that other signals are contained within the examined evidence, and could be based on manipulable factors such as emotion, sentiment, or part-of-speech (POS) frequencies, which are vulnerable to adversarial inputs. We neutralize some of these signals through multiple forms of both neural and non-neural pre-processing and style transfer, and find that this flattening of extraneous indicators can induce the models to actually require both claims and evidence to perform well. We conclude with the construction of a model using emotion vectors built off a lexicon and passed through an “emotional attention” mechanism to appropriately weight certain emotions. We provide quantifiable results that prove our hypothesis that manipulable features are being used for fact-checking.