Geopolitical event forecasting is a challenging task, as it requires understanding complex regional contexts, dynamic event signals, and uncertain future outcomes. Recent advances in large language model agents provide new opportunities for building forecasting systems that can reason with diverse sources and expert perspectives. In this paper, we present \textit{ForecastAgentSearch}, a preliminary framework that formulates geopolitical event forecasting as a multi-expert agent search problem. Given a forecasting query, the system first analyzes the task context, then searches and ranks relevant expert agents based on their regional knowledge, domain expertise, reliability, and complementarity. The selected agents provide specialized analyses, which are further coordinated to generate a final forecast with explanations and uncertainty awareness. We discuss the key design challenges of agent profiling, expert retrieval, ranking, and multi-agent coordination, and outline possible evaluation protocols for future development. This work aims to provide an initial step toward searchable and reliable agent-based forecasting systems.
Forecasting real-world events requires language-model agents to reason under uncertainty from incomplete, time-bounded information. Yet evaluating whether agents genuinely forecast requires more than final-answer accuracy: a model may be correct by recalling memorized training facts, citing fabricated evidence, or producing an unsupported causal story. We present WorldReasoner, an evaluation framework for temporally valid event forecasting. Each task gives an agent a resolved forecasting question, a simulated forecast date, and access only to evidence available before that date; after resolution, the framework scores the submitted probability, cited evidence, and optional causal event graph. WorldReasoner reports three complementary axes: outcome quality against resolved answers, evidence quality over cited sources, and reasoning quality against post-resolution hindsight graphs. The benchmark is built by an agentic construction pipeline that generates forecasting questions, collects time-stamped evidence, and builds hindsight reference graphs at scale, yielding 345 resolved tasks derived from 14,141 articles with graphs covering 8,087 extracted events. Across six controlled agent settings, temporally valid retrieval is the strongest driver of outcome accuracy; causal graph construction improves key-event recovery; and correct graph-enabled forecasts are more strongly grounded in key events and relevant sources, yet agents still struggle to convert grounded evidence into calibrated probabilities.
Forecasting future events is a critical challenge for large language model (LLM) agents, spanning domains from elections and monetary policy to financial markets. However, evaluating progress on this task presents a fundamental trade-off between efficiency and environment fidelity. While live evaluation benchmarks suffer from an inherently slow feedback loop, existing retrospective replays typically restrict agents to static, pre-frozen databases that sacrifice the environmental realism of actual deployments. To tackle this issue, we introduce Agentic Time Machine (TM), an infrastructure that approximately reconstructs the web state at any chosen past time by filtering post-cutoff content. Leveraging this evaluation infrastructure, we further propose a planner-solver-aggregator multi-agent framework that breaks each question into diverse analytical angles, gathers evidence in parallel, and combines the results into a single forecast. Experiments show that offline scores under TM correlate strongly with live FutureX scores, validating that TM offers a fast and reliable sandbox for forecasting-agent evaluation. On FutureX-Past and Polymarket evaluated under TM, our framework achieves the highest score among strong closed-book, tool-augmented, and self-consistency baselines. On the official FutureX live leaderboard, our system achieves the best average rank over four consecutive weeks, including 1st place in May Week 1. As of June 17, it also ranks 1st on FutureX's official eight-week overall leaderboard.
Forecasting benchmarks produce accuracy leaderboards but little insight into why some forecasters are more accurate than others. We introduce Bench to the Future 2 (BTF-2), 1,417 pastcasting questions with a frozen 15M-document research corpus in which agents reproducibly research and forecast offline, producing full reasoning traces. BTF-2 detects accuracy differences of 0.004 Brier score, and can distinguish differential agent strengths in research vs. judgment. We build a forecaster 0.011 Brier more accurate than any single frontier agent, and use it to evaluate agent strategic reasoning without hindsight bias. We find the better forecaster differs primarily in its pre-mortem analysis of its blind spots and consideration of black swans. Expert human forecasters found the dominant strategic reasoning failures of frontier agents are in assessing political and business leaders' incentives, judging their likelihood to follow through on stated plans, and modeling institutional processes.