What LLM Forecasters Know but Don't Say: Probing Internal Representations for Calibration and Faithfulness
Abstract
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.
Community
Language models as forecasters can be accurate while being badly calibrated and overconfident. Their chain-of-thought can also omit the evidence that actually changed a forecast.
In this new work, the results show that internal activations give us a much more reliable signal!
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- CALIBER: Calibrating Confidence Before and After Reasoning in Language Models (2026)
- Length Penalties Make Chain-of-Thought Less Monitorable (2026)
- Forecasting Future Behavior as a Learning Task (2026)
- LLMs as a Jury: Cross-Model Consensus Can Outperform Process Reward Models for LLM Reasoning (2026)
- Causal Tongue-Tie: LLMs Can Encode Causal Direction, But Their Yes/No Outputs Fail to Express (2026)
- Monitoring the Internal Monologue: Probe Trajectories Reveal Reasoning Dynamics (2026)
- Self-Evaluation Is Already There: Eliciting Latent Judge Calibration in Base LLMs with Minimal Data (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper