Jan 2026· arXiv.org· Vol abs/2601.19151· 1 citation· 74 references
Computer Science
TL;DR
Across 20 tasks from three public benchmarks, TS-Debate improves classification and question answering performance over strong baselines, while revealing that debate is most useful for global-structure and cross-view reasoning rather than local value reconstruction.
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as natural-language interfaces to structured data, yet they remain brittle when reasoning over time series. Visual patterns can be misleading, numerical claims can be hallucinated, and textual context can override evidence from the signal. We study zero-shot time-series reasoning as a multimodal evidence arbitration problem for LLM agents. We propose TS-Debate, an inference-time multi-agent protocol that requires no task-specific fine-tuning. TS-Debate first elicits relevant domain knowledge, then assigns modality-specialized agents to textual context, visual patterns, and numerical signals, and coordinates their interaction through a verification-conflict-calibration procedure. Reviewer agents check decision-critical claims with lightweight code execution and numerical lookup, resolve cross-modal disagreement, and calibrate the final answer. Unlike generic multi-agent debate or unconstrained tool use, TS-Debate specifies how evidence is exposed, which claims are checkable, and how verification outcomes shape synthesis. Across 20 tasks from three public benchmarks, TS-Debate improves classification and question answering performance over strong baselines, while revealing that debate is most useful for global-structure and cross-view reasoning rather than local value reconstruction.
It is suggested that current LLMs often rely on heuristic arbitration strategies when integrating heterogeneous evidence, highlighting a failure mode for tool-augmented decision systems.
Mattia Carletti, Edward Phillips, Fredrik K. Gustafsson et al.· 0 citations
Across multi-step visual tool-use benchmarks, SPARE achieves the highest average accuracy among pruning methods while removing 37.89-64.58\% of reasoning tokens, showing that reducing textual dominance restores reliance on visual evidence and mitigates over-conditioning on self-generated language.
Yuchen Huang, Sijia Li, Jun Zhang et al.· 0 citations
Large language models (LLMs) can struggle with time-series question answering (TS-QA), especially when numerical signals are serialized as text and require explicit computation. Tool-augmented approaches improve performance, but existing systems often intertwine language reasoning, computation, and perception, making i...
I. Delgado, Himansi Gupta, B. Khatri et al.· 0 citations
This paper argues that zero-shot TSF should be governed as an evidence-access claim and proposes a source-first taxonomy that separates three primary evidence sources---frozen LLM prior reuse, parametric time-series pretraining, and retrieval-augmented external memory---from the architectures that implement them.
De-Lu Kong, Wan-Yun Ling, Chen-Xi Liu et al.· 0 citations
This survey organizes the literature on uncertainty-aware MLLMs around a decision-centered framework: uncertainty sources give rise to observable signals, signals must be calibrated or controlled for risk, and calibrated uncertainty should determine the system action.
This work introduces DocHop, a benchmark for integrated chart--context reasoning in document-style images and constructs DocHop via a stochastic logic-first generation pipeline with controllable reasoning depth and visual density, to enable systematic evaluation.
Zhuoran Yu, Le Thien Phuc Nguyen, Jaden Park et al.· 1 citation
With $2.1 million funding from Google.org, the open-source Public Transit Intelligence Hub will unify public transit monitoring, operations, and passenger communication.
Professor Sherry Turkle’s new book, “Artificial Intimacy,” offers a withering critique of chatbots and the antisocial dynamics she believes they encourage.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.