Forecasting Supply Chain Disruptions with Foresight Learning

Large language models have achieved significant progress in event forecasting, yet their probability outputs exhibit systematic calibration bias that varies heterogeneously across different domains and question types, undermining the trustworthiness of probabilistic outputs for decision-making under uncertainty. However, existing calibration methods typically correct probability outputs after prediction is complete, without modeling the structural sources of bias within the prediction process itself. To address this challenge, we decompose probabilistic prediction over causal-temporal hypergraphs into three stages, evidence weighting, evidence aggregation, and source fusion, and propose CHAIN, which designs stage-specific mechanisms to mitigate bias at each stage: (i) modulating the temporal decay function by causal topological distance, (ii) aggregating approximately independent causal chains via Noisy-OR after direction-aware deduplication, and (iii) driving adaptive fusion by causal coverage and directional balance. Experimental results on cross-domain forecasting benchmarks show CHAIN outperforms existing methods in expected calibration error, Brier score, and accuracy. Our project is available at https://github.com/QwenQKing/Chain.

Large language models fine-tuned for forecasting can be accurate yet poorly calibrated, and their chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning may not faithfully reflect the evidence behind a forecast. We ask whether internal representations offer a more direct window into both. Working with Eternis-Forecaster 8B on OpenForesight, we train representation-pooling probes on intermediate activations and find they achieve substantially better calibration; a result that also holds for GLM-4.7-Flash and GLM-4.5-Air. We then assess CoT faithfulness through evidence ablation and diversionary injection: removing an influential source in the prompt often changes the model's forecast while leaving the reasoning trace untouched. The same probes function as lie detectors: their activations track behavioral shifts far better than the reasoning trace does, and they also predict the direction of change in 84% of cases, including when the CoT conceals the perturbation's influence. Finally, forced answering reveals that forecasts are largely fixed before reasoning begins: a single pre-reasoning pass recovers the committed answer and confidence, and routing questions by the spread of this pre-set answer distribution saves 30-47% of generated tokens, with no loss of accuracy. Together, these results establish probing internal representations as a practical tool for calibrating, auditing, and triaging language model forecasters and reasoning models more broadly.

This study examines the ability of large language models (LLMs) to predict the risk of weather-related forced outages in the distribution grid in a zero-shot framework, without labeled training data. The problem is formulated as a binary severity classification task across three forecast horizons (3h, 6h, 12h), using six years of outage records and high-resolution weather data for a utility service area in central Texas. Four zero-shot LLMs are benchmarked against two supervised classifiers across two input configurations: one using current weather observations and the other using weather forecast data. Results show that supervised models outperform LLMs on macro-F1 and precision, while newer LLM generations achieve competitive scores. Beyond accuracy, LLMs offer complementary strengths in actionable reasoning and geographic scalability, suggesting that combining them with supervised models may be the best practice.