Propose, Don't Judge: An Anytime-Valid Referee for LLM Agents That Mine Investment Factors
Abstract: Language-model agents now run the whole of quantitative factor research: they propose investment factors, backtest them, select the survivors and retire them. We ask which of those jobs an agent should keep. Our answer is governed self-evolution: the agent may propose, and a frozen statistical referee that the agent cannot touch must judge. The referee scores each candidate only on market outcomes revealed after submission, by betting, so its false-discovery guarantee holds at every stopping time for any proposal policy. We cross three proposers (a script, a bandit and a language model) with this referee and with three deliberately leaky ones, in a synthetic world with planted truth, a probe-authoring environment and a ten-year walk-forward on the CSI 500. Who judges sets the number of false admissions: the frozen referee admits 5-11 times fewer sub-threshold factors than the leaky referees under a scripted proposer, and no proposer closes that gap. Who proposes sets the yield: the language model beats the script, matches the bandit, and adds the one capability a bandit lacks, writing its own diagnostic probes. The certificate's price is time: an admitted true factor waits about 500 trading days, and the certified portfolio's Sharpe ratio therefore trails an ungated one. Judging belongs to the procedure; proposing and instrument-making belong to the agent.
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.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .
Verified source · arXiv.org
Reported by arXiv.org. Open the original for full media and formatting.
More in Research
All newsDEEPO: Dual-Entropy Enhanced Policy Optimization for Hallucination in MLLMs
Reinforcement learning (RL) is widely used to sharpen reasoning in multimodal large language models (MLLMs), yet its effect on hallucination is uneven. We trace this to two weak points in the \emph{correction chain} from reward to parameter update. At the rollout level, hard queries---those with high semantic entropy---frequently produce unanimously wrong sample groups, collapsing the group-relative advantage to zero exactly where hallucination risk is highest. At the optimization level, confident-but-wrong tokens are gradient-invisible: a categorical policy's expected score-gradient norm van…
Read at arXiv cs.AITW3Cast: A Frozen Router of Lightly Fine-Tuned Foundation Models for Time-Series Forecasting on GIFT-Eval, Selected Entirely on the Training Split
TW3Cast is a time-series forecasting system that reaches position 3 of 130 entries on the GIFT-Eval benchmark by mean MASE rank, as of 2026-09-14. The two entries above it belong to the leaderboard's agentic category, multi-step systems that use agents or language models to reason about, generate or select forecasts. TW3Cast runs no agent and no language model. Its selection is a table computed once on the training split and then frozen, and its experts are public foundation models lightly fine-tuned on those training splits. For each of the 97 dataset, frequency and horizon configurations, t…
Read at arXiv cs.AIWhen Should Forecasting Agents Reason? Behavioral Stress Tests for Reliability Routing
Forecasting agents increasingly combine language-model reasoning, retrieval, ensembling, and calibration, but it remains unclear when each behavior should be trusted. We study this question on ForecastBench-style binary forecasting tasks, treating the choice to retrieve, reason, defer to a market prior, or use a historical analog as an observable agent behavior rather than a hidden implementation detail. Our central finding is that mechanism choice is source-dependent: structured analogs dominate for some data-generating processes, while market/crowd-style and conservative baselines are bette…
Read at arXiv cs.AITWIST: A Proposed Benchmark for Intervention Quality in Conversational Memory, with a Human-Validated Draft-Alignment
Long-conversation memory benchmarks increasingly test recall and prompted knowledge updates, and recent work studies evolving user beliefs and memory state. TWIST is a proposed benchmark suite for a complementary, unmeasured property: intervention quality -- whether a deployed memory system, exercised through its own ingest/recall/vet surface, acts correctly at belief change points. Four tracks cover unprompted tension detection, vetting outgoing drafts against the record, answering with current beliefs while preserving supersession history, and governing sensitive recall. The suite extends L…
Read at arXiv cs.AI