arXiv preprint ·
LLMs Don't Know What They Know: Benchmarking Temporal Self-Knowledge for Financial Backtesting
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Financial backtests of large language models (LLMs) are meaningful only if the model did not already know the outcomes it is asked to predict. Practitioners guard against this by trusting a vendor's stated knowledge cutoff, by asking the model what it knows, or by instructing it to answer as of a past date. To verify whether any of these safeguards can be trusted, we introduce FinDendro, a benchmark of 2,226 dated U.S. facts from 1999 to 2026, covering monthly macroeconomic series, month-end stock prices and Federal Reserve decisions. Each fact yields four prompts: a value question, Recall and Predict questions that pair each candidate value with a claim of knowing or guessing without a declared date, and a Predict question with a historical declared date. Controls for persistence and dominant outcomes keep chance accuracy near 0.27. Results show that for most frontier models, self-reports understate knowledge. GPT-5 answers 76% of controlled facts correctly but claims to know 38%, and answers 61% of the facts it says it does not know. Knowledge claims can persist beyond the measured knowledge boundary, by up to seven quarters, and a declared date removes most of the claims of prior knowledge while leaving accuracy unchanged. Backtests inside a model's training window therefore cannot be certified leak-free by self-report, instruction or stated cutoff. These findings motivate behavioral measurement of temporal knowledge boundaries, and FinDendro provides a benchmark and procedure for selecting backtest periods based on demonstrated factual knowledge.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
How Well Can Large Language Models Impersonate Individual Authors? A Comparative Evaluation
HyFlash: A Prefix-Memory Prior for On-Device Speculative Decoding
Phonological Knowledge of Chinese Characters in Language Models
Encoding and Propagation of Grammatical Number in Large Language Models
Matching the Training-Time Weight Rule in Inference-Time Expert Deactivation
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.