用市场真实交易行为评估模型对金融言论的理解能力。
StakeBench: Evaluating Language Understanding Grounded in Market Commitment

- 以真实市场交易记录替代人工标注,检验模型是否理解言论背后的立场
- 15个大模型在立场识别准确率仅0.506至0.599之间,后续任务表现更差
- 适合关注金融语言模型真实可信度的研究者与开发者
现有金融NLP基准多依赖外部观察者的标签,衡量的是语言的感知而非说话人的真实市场承诺。我们提出StakeBench,一个基于市场承诺的语言理解评估框架。该框架将来自2,261个已结算市场的560,876条评论,与Polymarket和Manifold平台上的已验证持仓、交易行为及市场赔率记录进行关联。监督信号来自可观察的市场行为:持仓方向、评论后交易动作及赔率轨迹替代人工标注。四个诊断任务测试模型是否能检测市场承诺、识别揭示方向、预测未来动作以及进行集体赔率预测。三个承诺感知指标衡量模型与实际行为的一致性,而非情感倾向。通过有效性审计和明确解释边界,区分可观察承诺信号与潜在信念及因果赔率影响。在15个LLM、18个主题和平台设置下,模型部分恢复了持仓方向信号(定向准确率0.506–0.599),但在后续任务中表现出结构性缺陷:十个模型在预测未来动作时退化为一到两个标签,无模型在集体赔率预测中持续优于基线。模型规模与性能无关,金融领域微调未提升方向识别能力,平台激励机制显著影响高阶结果。StakeBench代码与数据集已开源,采用CC-BY 4.0许可。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Existing financial NLP benchmarks often rely on labels supplied by outside observers, measuring how language is perceived rather than what speakers have committed to in the market. We introduce StakeBench, an evaluation framework for language understanding grounded in market commitment. StakeBench links 560,876 comments from 2,261 resolved markets to verified position, action, and market-odds records across Polymarket and Manifold. Supervision is derived from observable market behavior. Position sides, post-comment trading actions, and market-odds trajectories replace human annotation. Four diagnostic tasks test whether models detect market commitment, identify the revealed side, anticipate future action, and perform collective odds projection. Three commitment-aware metrics measure alignment with revealed preferences rather than perceived sentiment. Validity audits and explicit interpretation boundaries help distinguish observable commitment signals from latent belief and causal market-odds impact. Across 15 LLMs and 18 topics and platform settings, models partially recover position-side signals, with Directed Accuracy from 0.506 to 0.599, but show structural failures on later tasks. Ten of the fifteen models collapse to one or two action labels in future action anticipation, and no model consistently improves on the naive odds-direction baseline in collective odds projection. Model scale is not correlated with performance, finance-domain tuning does not improve revealed-side identification, and platform incentives strongly shape higher-order results. StakeBench is packaged with evaluation code and dataset under CC-BY 4.0.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。