We introduce WC2026-Agents, a benchmark and dataset for evaluating large language models (LLMs) as autonomous forecasting agents on real, future events. For every one of the 104 matches of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, four frontier models -- Claude Opus 4.8, ChatGPT (GPT-5.5, high reasoning), Gemini 3.1 Pro, and Grok (Expert Mode) -- ran an identical search-act-reflect loop: gather evidence with a web tool, commit to a 1X2 (team-A win / draw / team-B win) distribution and a virtual 100-USD bet, and, after the match, reflect given only the final score. Because every match kicked off after the models'training cutoffs, the benchmark is contamination-free by construction. Crucially, we pair the four agents with a fifth competitor drawn from the same information environment -- the pre-match betting market -- collected as per-match 1X2 odds, giving an economically grounded baseline and letting us score not just what an agent predicts but what it does with money. The release contains 416 forecasts and 414 reflections with verbatim reasoning, ground truth (including penalty shootouts), odds, and a reproducible evaluation suite. A reference evaluation surfaces findings that raw accuracy hides: the four agents issue an identical top pick in 92% of matches and none beats the market's Brier score; indeed, a naive flat stake on the market favorite out-earns all four agents. Yet the agents diverge sharply as decision-makers: betting return-on-investment ranges from -18% to +10%, fading the market is unprofitable for all four, the share of forecasts that cite the market ranges from 12% to 100%, and self-reported error rates on wrong picks range from 36% to 86%. The benchmark thus measures calibration, decision quality, and self-knowledge -- axes on which frontier models differ even when their predictions do not. Data and code: https://github.com/graphuofm/FIFA2026LLM
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.
Language model agents now execute bounded tasks reliably. Whether they can sustain effective decision-making over long horizons, where actions have cumulative consequences and the environment responds to their choices, remains largely unmeasured. FM-Bench (Football Management Benchmark) measures this. An LLM agent runs...
Tianyou Wang, Chong-Yang Gao, Ke-Zhen Chen et al.· 1 citation
This work forks live SWE-bench agent trajectories at controlled points, rebuild the environment, continue each fork with a different model, and compare against same-model control forks that isolate sampling and replay noise, finding configuration-dependent temperature-0"determinism" is configuration-dependent.
Findings show that rapidly changing, unstructured information can provide a valuable forecasting signal alongside structured statistics, whereas adding critic and meta-agent stages does not necessarily create complementary information or improve on the strongest specialist.
Julian Varghese, Lucas Bickmann, Sarah Sandmann· 0 citations
It is suggested that reasoning alone is not sufficient for tournament forecasting when the task depends on current squads, recent performance, injuries, rankings, and evolving football context, and this study provides a reproducible evaluation framework for large language model-based sports forecasting.
Ádám Hartvég, Domonkos Dékány, Barbara Simon et al.· Forecasting· 0 citations
Every headline survives day-clustered inference, permutation nulls, and a common-fee restatement; the paper closes with a 17-rule methodology canon bought with the authors' own retractions.
T. Barton, Chris Constantakis, Patti Hauseman et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.