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

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.05030v1
• Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2026 16:34:53 GMT
• Title: From Score Matrices to Football-Aware Match-State Simulation: An Auditable LLM Harness for Exact-Score Reranking
• Abstract summary: Football score forecasting combines a strong statistical core with a difficult contextual edge.<n>We combine both components through an auditable information harness.<n>On a 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.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• 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.

Related papers

• ReDraft, Don't Just Distill: Reference-Driven Revision for Continual VLLM Post-Training [66.72708893922605]
  Post-training of large multimodal models should add new capabilities while preserving those from pre-training.<n>SFT gives explicit target supervision that learns a task from near-zero accuracy, but its off-policy targets move the model far enough to cause forgetting.<n>We introduce ReDraft, which obtains both from the model's own failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-15T04:59:03Z)
• Scored vs. Generated Readouts in Behavioral Language Models: An Empirical Study of Elicitation Format [0.0]
  We compare probabilities obtained by scoring answer tokens with predictions generated after a written rationale.<n>Across 13 model-domain cells covering four retail tasks, the scored readout ranks outcomes more accurately in 12 of 13 cells.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-09T08:37:46Z)
• Marginal Fidelity Does Not Establish User Simulation in Demographic Synthetic Survey Panels: Response Contracts, Support Collapse and Conditioning Failure [51.736723807086385]
  Population-marginal agreement is evidence about an elicitation contract and an estimand obtainable without simulated respondents, not evidence of individual simulation.<n>On nine aligned model-battery pairs, a no-persona population-prevalence query averages 6.27 MAE versus 12.39 for committed panels and wins all nine comparisons.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T10:22:22Z)
• A Statistical and Machine Learning Framework for Quantifying Offensive Impact in Professional Box Lacrosse [1.3537117504260623]
  This study develops a framework for estimating expected goals (xG) and attributing recorded offensive involvement using 1,006 manually annotated Rochester Knighthawks shot attempts.<n> Logistic regression, random forest, and extremely randomized trees were evaluated across three nested feature sets.<n>The results are an initial case study rather than league-wide or causal estimates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-06T13:55:53Z)
• Accurate Ensembles, Fragile Narratives: Multi-Scale Stacking and a Fidelity Audit of LLM-Generated Explanations for Credit Risk [0.0]
  Credit scoring increasingly relies on models whose decision logic cannot be read off their parameters.<n>A common proposal closes that gap with a language model: compute feature attributions, hand them to an LLM, and let it write the rationale.<n>We build such a system end to end and test whether the second half of the promise holds.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-08T13:22:14Z)
• AI World Cup 2026: Benchmarking Large Language Models for End-to-End Football Tournament Prediction [0.0]
  This paper reports the completed emphAI World Cup benchmark, in which ten-based assistants made a single pre-tournament forecast of the entire 2026 FIFA World Cup.<n>Forecasts covered group-stage scores, group rankings, the knockout bracket, final placings, confidence values, and short explanations.<n>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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T10:07:14Z)
• WorldCupArena: Fine-Grained Evaluation of Language Models and Deep-Research Agents on Football Forecasting [10.941871398755403]
  We present WorldCupArena, a benchmark for language models and deep-research agents.<n>It predicts the result and score, likely players and events, match statistics, and the outcome of the competition.<n>We report result accuracy, exact-score accuracy, and a scoreline score that gives some credit when a predicted score is close but not exact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-20T15:52:48Z)
• Perception or Prejudice: Can MLLMs Go Beyond First Impressions of Personality? [74.69723255239663]
  Grounded Personality Reasoning requires MLLMs to anchor each Big Five rating in observable evidence through a chain of rating, reasoning, and grounding.<n> MM-OCEAN is produced by a multi-agent pipeline with human verification, with timestamped behavioral observations, evidence-grounded trait analyses, and seven categories of cue-grounding MCQs.<n>The analysis uncovers a striking Prejudice Gap: across the field, 51% of correct ratings are not grounded in retrieved cues, and the Holistic-Grounding Rate spans only 0-33.5%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-21T07:42:47Z)
• Step-wise Rubric Rewards for LLM Reasoning [72.17879367869503]
  Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) is widely used to improve reasoning in large language models.<n>We find 18.2% of steps in correct responses are wrong yet positively rewarded.<n>Across six mathematical reasoning benchmarks, SRaR improves average accuracy over RaR by 3.57 points.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T07:08:14Z)
• Simulation-Based Optimisation of Batting Order and Bowling Plans in T20 Cricket [0.0]
  This paper develops a unified Markov Decision Process framework for optimising two recurring in-match decisions in T20 cricket.<n>The optimal batting order improves Mumbai Indians' win probability by 4.1 percentage points (52.4% to 56.5%), and the optimal Gujarat Titans bowling plan improves defend probability by 5.2 percentage points (39.1% to 44.3%)<n>In both cases, the observed sub-optimality is consistent with phase-agnostic deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-15T13:28:45Z)
• vla-eval: A Unified Evaluation Harness for Vision-Language-Action Models [58.633451339058986]
  VLA models are typically evaluated using per benchmark scripts maintained independently by each model repository.<n>We present vla eval, an open source evaluation harness that decouples model inference from benchmark execution.<n>A complete evaluation requires only two commands: vla eval serve and vla eval run.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-14T14:38:53Z)
• ObjexMT: Objective Extraction and Metacognitive Calibration for LLM-as-a-Judge under Multi-Turn Jailbreaks [12.396822247035578]
  We present exMT, a benchmark for objective extraction and metacognition.<n>Given a multi-turn transcript, a model must output a one-sentence base objective and a self-reported confidence.<n> Accuracy is scored by similarity to gold objectives, then thresholded once on 300 calibration items.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-23T03:32:04Z)
• Tracing LLM Reasoning Processes with Strategic Games: A Framework for Planning, Revision, and Resource-Constrained Decision Making [38.75183725659772]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for tasks that require complex reasoning.<n>We argue that measuring internal processes is essential for understanding model behavior and improving reliability.<n>We introduce a framework that evaluates LLMs along three core dimensions: planning, revision, and resource-constrained decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-13T17:59:10Z)
• HCQA-1.5 @ Ego4D EgoSchema Challenge 2025 [77.414837862995]
  We present a method that achieves third place for Ego4D Egocentric Challenge in CVPR 2025.<n>Our approach introduces a multi-source aggregation strategy to generate diverse predictions, followed by a confidence-based filtering mechanism.<n>Our method achieves 77% accuracy on over 5,000 human-curated multiple-choice questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T02:45:14Z)
• Benchmarking Reasoning Robustness in Large Language Models [76.79744000300363]
  We find significant performance degradation on novel or incomplete data.<n>These findings highlight the reliance on recall over rigorous logical inference.<n>This paper introduces a novel benchmark, termed as Math-RoB, that exploits hallucinations triggered by missing information to expose reasoning gaps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T15:36:06Z)
• Language Generation with Strictly Proper Scoring Rules [70.340673452404]
  We propose a strategy for adapting scoring rules to language generation, allowing for language modeling with any non-local scoring rules. We train language generation models using two classic strictly proper scoring rules, the Brier score and the Spherical score, as alternatives to the logarithmic score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T09:09:00Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.