RealFin is a benchmark for evaluating whether large language models can reason about finance when a user leaves a crucial premise unstated.
The benchmark focuses on logical underdetermination in financial reasoning: instead of asking models to directly solve fully specified finance questions, RealFin asks models to identify the missing condition that is necessary to make the problem answerable.
Financial questions often look answerable on the surface while silently depending on an unstated assumption, condition, or institutional rule. RealFin converts finance exam-style questions into condition-missing multiple-choice questions. Each item contains:
This setup evaluates whether a model can recognize what information is missing before attempting to answer.
The released benchmark files are in datasets/:
| File | Language | # Items | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
datasets/missing_questions_Chinese.csv | Chinese | 175 | Condition-missing questions constructed from Chinese finance/accounting problems. |
datasets/missing_questions_English.csv | English | 367 | Condition-missing questions constructed from English finance problems. |
Each CSV file uses UTF-8 encoding and contains the following columns:
| Column | Description |
|---|---|
ID | Example identifier within the file. |
Question_Type | Finance domain or source category. |
Question | The underspecified question shown to the model. |
Option A - Option D | Candidate missing conditions. |
Correct Answer | The option label corresponding to the necessary missing condition. |
Given the Question and four candidate options, a model should select the option that identifies the critical missing premise. The intended output is one of A, B, C, or D.
Example prompt template:
You are given a financial reasoning question that may be underspecified.
Select the option that provides the most critical missing condition required to answer it.
Question:
{Question}
A. {Option A}
B. {Option B}
C. {Option C}
D. {Option D}
Answer with only one letter: A, B, C, or D.
Model evaluation scripts are provided in models/. The normal_* scripts evaluate models on fully specified questions, while the mask_* scripts evaluate models on the condition-missing setting.
The scripts are intended as reference implementations and may require local model paths, API keys, or environment-specific configuration before running.
This repository is released under the license in LICENSE.
If you use these datasets and scripts, please cite:
@inproceedings{dai2026realfin,
title = {RealFin: How Well Do LLMs Reason About Finance When Users Leave Things Unsaid?},
author = {Dai*, Yuyang and Lin*, Yan and Xie, Zhuohan and Wang, Yuxia},
booktitle = {Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026},
year = {2026}
}
Python
100.0%
RealFin is a benchmark for evaluating whether large language models can reason about finance when a user leaves a crucial premise unstated.
The benchmark focuses on logical underdetermination in financial reasoning: instead of asking models to directly solve fully specified finance questions, RealFin asks models to identify the missing condition that is necessary to make the problem answerable.
Financial questions often look answerable on the surface while silently depending on an unstated assumption, condition, or institutional rule. RealFin converts finance exam-style questions into condition-missing multiple-choice questions. Each item contains:
This setup evaluates whether a model can recognize what information is missing before attempting to answer.
The released benchmark files are in datasets/:
| File | Language | # Items | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
datasets/missing_questions_Chinese.csv | Chinese | 175 | Condition-missing questions constructed from Chinese finance/accounting problems. |
datasets/missing_questions_English.csv | English | 367 | Condition-missing questions constructed from English finance problems. |
Each CSV file uses UTF-8 encoding and contains the following columns:
| Column | Description |
|---|---|
ID | Example identifier within the file. |
Question_Type | Finance domain or source category. |
Question | The underspecified question shown to the model. |
Option A - Option D | Candidate missing conditions. |
Correct Answer | The option label corresponding to the necessary missing condition. |
Given the Question and four candidate options, a model should select the option that identifies the critical missing premise. The intended output is one of A, B, C, or D.
Example prompt template:
You are given a financial reasoning question that may be underspecified.
Select the option that provides the most critical missing condition required to answer it.
Question:
{Question}
A. {Option A}
B. {Option B}
C. {Option C}
D. {Option D}
Answer with only one letter: A, B, C, or D.
Model evaluation scripts are provided in models/. The normal_* scripts evaluate models on fully specified questions, while the mask_* scripts evaluate models on the condition-missing setting.
The scripts are intended as reference implementations and may require local model paths, API keys, or environment-specific configuration before running.
This repository is released under the license in LICENSE.
If you use these datasets and scripts, please cite:
@inproceedings{dai2026realfin,
title = {RealFin: How Well Do LLMs Reason About Finance When Users Leave Things Unsaid?},
author = {Dai*, Yuyang and Lin*, Yan and Xie, Zhuohan and Wang, Yuxia},
booktitle = {Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026},
year = {2026}
}
Python
100.0%