The surge of large language models (LLMs) has revolutionized the extraction and analysis of crucial information from a growing volume of financial statements, announcements, and business news. Recognition for named entities to construct structured data poses a significant challenge in analyzing financial documents and is a foundational task for intelligent financial analytics. However, how effective are these generic LLMs and their performance under various prompts are yet need a better understanding. To fill in the blank, we present a systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art LLMs and prompting methods in the financial Named Entity Recognition (NER) problem. Specifically, our experimental results highlight their strengths and limitations, identify five representative failure types, and provide insights into their potential and challenges for domain-specific tasks.

We propose a new commonsense reasoning benchmark to motivate commonsense reasoning progress from two perspectives: (1) Evaluating whether models can distinguish knowledge quality by predicting if the knowledge is enough to answer the question; (2) Evaluating whether models can develop commonsense inference capabilities that generalize across tasks. We first extract supporting knowledge for each question and ask humans to annotate whether the auto-extracted knowledge is enough to answer the question or not. After that, we convert different tasks into a unified question-answering format to evaluate the models’ generalization capabilities. We name the benchmark Commonsense Inference with Knowledge-in-the-loop Question Answering (\name). Experiments show that with our learning paradigm, models demonstrate encouraging generalization capabilities. At the same time, we also notice that distinguishing knowledge quality remains challenging for current commonsense reasoning models.