cs.AIAug 5, 2026

From Score Matrices to Football-Aware Match-State Simulation: An Auditable LLM Harness for Exact-Score Reranking

Authors: Shaopeng Liang

Organizations: Independent Researcher

Abstract

Football score forecasting combines a strong statistical core with a difficult contextual edge. Dynamic Poisson-family models estimate team strength, expected goals, and coherent score probabilities, but do not directly understand roles, tactical matchups, motivation, or how a first goal changes behaviour. Large language models (LLMs) can reason about such concepts, yet are not calibrated probability engines. We combine both components through an auditable information harness. This paper documents four iterations: V1, a dynamic score-driven Dixon-Coles baseline; V2, which maps LLM contextual ratings back into expected-goal parameters; V3, which replaces scalar correction with goal-by-goal simulations over a frozen score-candidate set; and V4, which adds shared first-breakthrough and post-goal cascade judgments, time-aware stopping, and deterministic tail candidates. The harness defines input semantics, supplies pre-match evidence, and constrains the LLM to an inspectable reasoning route. On a chronological replay of the first 150 matches of the 2025-26 English Premier League, V1 achieved 10.0% Top-1 and 26.7% Top-3 exact-score accuracy. V3 reached 12.0% and 30.0%, while V4 reached 14.7% and 30.7%. V4 increased candidate coverage from 77.3% to 84.7%, although no added tail candidate became a Top-3 exact hit. V1's native 1X2 distribution achieved 53.3% argmax accuracy, 0.9878 log loss, 0.5870 Brier score, and 0.2095 ranked probability score. These results are exploratory: the development slice is not an untouched benchmark, and temporal input isolation cannot exclude outcome memory in a closed LLM. The contribution is an auditable hybrid architecture, a clear design evolution, and negative findings showing where football-aware simulation does and does not improve score selection.

Explore similar work

Jul 20, 2026cs.AI

WorldCupArena: Fine-Grained Evaluation of Language Models and Deep-Research Agents on Football Forecasting

Predicting a football match before kickoff requires more than knowing past results: a model must use changing information and make a clear prediction before the answer is available. We present WorldCupArena, a dynamic benchmark for language models and deep-research agents. The 2026 FIFA World Cup is its first evaluation, and the same process can be reused for future leagues and cups. Before each match, a model either receives a common evidence package or searches for information itself. It predicts the result and score, likely players and events, match statistics, and the outcome of the competition. After the match, these predictions are compared with the recorded result. We report result accuracy, exact-score accuracy, and a scoreline score that gives some credit when a predicted score is close but not exact, together with scores for the other prediction tasks. Across systems, similar result accuracy can mask larger differences in detailed predictions. Four systems predicted champion Spain, and two of them also recovered the exact final pairing. Compared with betting-market and human-fan baselines, the best system shows only small gains in result and exact-score accuracy, but a clearer gain in Scoreline. New schedules can be added as they begin, allowing the benchmark to evaluate future models without using outcomes that are already known. Code, predictions and evaluation scripts will be publicly released.
Aug 4, 2026cs.CL

WorldCup Arena: Prospective, Leakage-Free Evaluation of Frontier LLMs on a Live Tournament

Benchmarks that measure the forecasting ability of large language models are almost always retrospective: the event has happened, the answer is somewhere on the Web, and the evaluation must defend itself against memorisation. We report the opposite design. Over the 39 days of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, six frontier LLMs -- all with extended thinking and native server-side web search -- were asked before every kickoff, one match at a time, to fill in a seven-market prediction card for all 104 matches, plus 12 group winners and a pre-tournament outright pool; no answer existed when the question was asked, so the evaluation is leakage-free by construction rather than by filtering, and the frozen archive holds 4,494 scored predictions. What the tournament establishes is a set of behaviours the six systems share. On match outcome they average 63.9%, level with backing the bookmaker's favourite -- which is in fact what they usually do. They agree with one another far more often than they are right, so a majority vote adds nothing. They under-commit to draws and to goals, and crowd their scoreline picks onto a single prototypical result. Accuracy tracks how lopsided a fixture is rather than how much is known about it: it collapses in the closest ties, where the dossiers are richest, while questions about the tournament as a whole are answered well. On this task the current generation of frontier systems is not sharply differentiated: the standings hold up at the top and the bottom across the run and churn in the middle, and the margins stay narrow throughout. The briefing dossiers, fixtures and official results are released as a benchmark, together with the scoring code.
Aug 4, 2026cs.AI

AI World Cup 2026: Benchmarking Large Language Models for End-to-End Football Tournament Prediction

Large language models (LLMs) are now regularly asked to forecast real-world events, but comparisons are often difficult because models receive different information, use different tools, and are evaluated under different rules. This paper reports the completed \emph{AI World Cup} benchmark, in which ten LLM-based assistants made a single pre-tournament forecast of the entire 2026 FIFA World Cup. Every submission used the same tournament snapshot, prompt, JSON schema, and scoring procedure. The forecasts covered group-stage scores, group rankings, the knockout bracket, final placings, confidence values, and short explanations. After all 104 matches had been played, GPT-5.5 Thinking finished first with 744 points, followed by GPT-5.5 with 717, Gemini with 699, and Qwen 3.7 with 687. GPT-5.5 Thinking was also the only model to select Spain, which defeated Argentina 1--0 in the final, as champion. The final ranking was driven mainly by knockout performance: total score was strongly correlated with knockout points (r=0.986r=0.986), but showed little relationship with group-stage match points (r=0.055r=0.055), group-standing points (r=−0.103r=-0.103), or their combined pre-knockout score (r=−0.054r=-0.054). Match-level accuracy produced a different ordering. Claude Sonnet 4.6 correctly predicted the largest number of group-stage outcomes (63.89%) but placed sixth overall. Average self-reported confidence was also unrelated to either outcome accuracy (r=−0.060r=-0.060) or total score (r=−0.067r=-0.067). The results suggest that forecasting a complete tournament tests something different from predicting matches one at a time, while also showing how strongly a bracket-based leaderboard can depend on scoring design. The benchmark materials, raw responses, and scoring code are released to support replication and future extensions.