FinProBench: Evaluating Financial AI Agents with Role-Grounded Rubrics Derived from Professional Deliverables
Abstract: Evaluating financial AI agents requires criteria aligned with real professional work. Existing rubric methods typically derive criteria from task prompts or model outputs, overlooking tacit standards visible only in practitioner deliverables. We introduce FinProBench, a benchmark for professional financial tasks, and Role-Grounded Rubric Construction (RGRC), a reusable pipeline that derives rubrics from deliverables produced by practitioners in the same role. RGRC comprises four stages: Deliverable Collection, Competency Extraction, Rubric Synthesis, and Validation. Its rubrics capture tacit standards, distinguish quality levels, and transfer across tasks within a role. Before analysis, we classified 57 occupations by deliverable genre into 30 prior-rich conventional roles and 27 prior-sparse role-specialized roles. Across all roles, Prompt-only nearly matches RGRC for conventional roles (89.2% vs. 90.7%), but RGRC substantially outperforms it for role-specialized roles (99.1% vs. 78.0%). This split indicates that prompt engineering can approximate rubrics when conventions are well represented in model priors, while professional grounding is essential for standards beyond those priors. FinProBench is built from 1,723 curated deliverables spanning 57 occupations, 8 financial sub-industries, and 161 deliverable types, and releases an initial evaluation set of 20 complete tasks covering 20 roles in 7 sub-industries. With heterogeneous LLM judges and role-level rubrics, human deliverables rank first on average (73.7 vs. 70.3, 70.2, and 69.6 out of 100), while all four systems show overlapping 95% confidence intervals and complementary strengths. Reusing rubrics at the role level reduces estimated per-task construction effort by 6.7 times relative to authoring each rubric from scratch.
Submission history
Access Paper:
Current browse context:
References & Citations
BibTeX formatted citation
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Verified source · arXiv.org
Reported by arXiv.org. Open the original for full media and formatting.
More in Research
All newsMonte Carlo Tree Search for Table-to-Multimodal Report Generation
Automatically generating professional multimodal reports comprising both textual analysis and visual charts from structured tabular data is a critical challenge in data intelligence. Existing methods suffer from fixed linear pipelines and isolated subtask processing, which hinder joint optimization of factual accuracy, visual quality, and narrative coherence. To address these issues, this paper proposes MCTS-Report, a Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS)-driven framework that formulates multimodal table-to-report generation as a progressive construction process over a structured search space. The c…
Read at arXiv cs.AIBrainBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Comprehensive EEG Understanding
Electroencephalography (EEG) analysis extends beyond assigning predefined labels to recordings; it requires workflows connecting natural-language instructions, signal processing, quantitative evidence, and scientific interpretation. We term this capability \emph{comprehensive EEG understanding}. Existing evaluations, however, primarily target isolated decoding tasks or system-specific demonstrations, leaving the competence of large language models (LLMs) insufficiently quantified. We introduce \benchmarkname{}, a unified benchmark for comprehensive, instruction-conditioned EEG understanding.…
Read at arXiv cs.AIA Long-Run Persistence Theory for AI Systems under the Redundancy-Adjusted Artificial Age Score (AAS)
Artificial intelligence systems are increasingly expected to operate over repeated cycles of interaction, adaptation, and update rather than through isolated one-shot outputs. This raises a fundamental theoretical question: can an AI system persist indefinitely without incurring unbounded structural aging? This paper develops a long-run persistence framework for AI systems based on the redundancy-adjusted Artificial Age Score (AAS). The model extends AAS from a static evaluative measure into a cycle-level functional that generates an age sequence across repeated operation. At each cycle, stru…
Read at arXiv cs.AIThe LLM Proposes, the Executive Disposes: A Self-Verifying Agent Instrument that Dissociates Commitment Drift from Binding Drift in Long-Horizon Agents
How do you verify a long-horizon agent when its own state and self-reports are exactly what you cannot trust? We present an agent instrument built so that verification is structural rather than post-hoc. A deterministic Executive owns all belief; a language model may only file typed proposals, and a claim is admitted only when a prediction pre-registered before acting is matched against observation by code. Two properties make the instrument a verifier of its own science, not just of the agent: every run invalidates itself when per-organ write-error, render-size, or salted-canary-echo floors…
Read at arXiv cs.AI