Two Heads Are Better Than One: Aggregating Weaker LLMs for Better Forecasts

Large language models (LLMs) now support forecasting systems that combine language-based reasoning with temporal data, evidence retrieval, external tools, and iterative prediction. We investigate LLM-based forecasting agents, meaning systems in which a language model contributes to a scored prediction about a future or currently unobserved target. We organize architectures into three groups. Standalone LLM workflows operate on encoded time series or event context. Tool- and retrieval-augmented agents incorporate external evidence. Hybrid systems pair LLMs with statistical or foundation models. We then review training methods and evaluation protocols. We examine negative as well as positive evidence, including sensitivity to small input perturbations, ablations in which the LLM component does not improve accuracy, and benchmark gains that may reflect contamination instead of temporal reasoning. We cover applications in finance, weather, health, energy, and operations, and we summarize the benchmarks and datasets used for evaluation. The evidence indicates that measurement is a central limitation. Future work requires calibration under distribution shift, contamination-resistant live evaluation, explicit reporting of cost and accuracy together, and methods for handling feedback between deployed forecasts and the outcomes being forecast.

Top AI forecasting systems are approaching superforecaster-level accuracy on future world events, but still rely primarily on off-the-shelf LLMs combined with forecasting-specific context gathering and scaffolding. We study how to improve this recipe through ensembling: given a fixed number of samples, which off-the-shelf model forecasts should be combined to maximize accuracy? On binary questions from the Metaculus AI Benchmark, we find that individual accuracy is not enough: many frontier LLMs make highly correlated predictions, limiting the value of additional forecasts from the same or similar models. Instead, the strongest ensembles combine accurate but diverse forecasters, with models such as \model{Grok 4} contributing disproportionately because their predictions are less correlated with other frontier LLMs. These results suggest that the strength of the AI crowd comes not from sampling more forecasts indiscriminately, but from combining forecasts across models with complementary errors, motivating forecasting systems that explicitly optimize for both model quality and diversity.

LLM agents are increasingly used for live forecasting, where they retrieve up-to-date information and produce estimates for unresolved future events. However, current agentic forecasting often relies on implicit narrative aggregation: agents collect evidence, discuss it in prose, and often assign a probability without an explicit update path from evidence to forecast. This limits both forecasting accuracy and auditability. We propose AuditForecast, an agentic scaffold for structured probabilistic forecasting. AuditForecast first anchors the forecast with a suitable quantitative baseline model, uses model-guided data retrieval to derive a base probability, and then applies situational factor updates outside the model's scope through mechanical aggregation in odds space. This turns forecasting from a prose-based judgment into a structured process with explicit intermediate objects. Across multiple live forecasting benchmarks, AuditForecast improves forecasting accuracy and calibration relative to strong agentic baselines, surpasses market-implied references in several settings, and outperforms substantially more expensive deep-research agents while remaining Pareto-dominant in the cost--accuracy tradeoff. Beyond performance gains, AuditForecast produces an auditable forecasting report that makes forecast construction explicit and supports systematic post hoc analysis.