# Time Series Augmented Generation for Financial Applications

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19633 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.19633/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 10 of its 28 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 21 Apr 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Gorilla: Large Language Model Connected with Massive APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15334/) (2023)
- [BloombergGPT: A Large Language Model for Finance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17564/) (2023)
- [ViperGPT: Visual Inference via Python Execution for Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08128/) (2023)
- [Time Series Forecasting With Deep Learning: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.13408/) (2020)
- [Hooks in the Headline: Learning to Generate Headlines with Controlled Styles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.01980/) (2020)
- [TimeXL: Explainable Multi-modal Time Series Prediction with LLM-in-the-Loop](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.01013/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Agentic Trading: When LLM Agents Meet Financial Markets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.19337/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Evaluating the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) for complex, quantitative financial tasks is a critical and unsolved challenge. Standard benchmarks often fail to isolate an agent's core ability to parse queries and orchestrate computations. To address this, we introduce a novel evaluation methodology and benchmark designed to rigorously measure an LLM agent's reasoning for financial time-series analysis. We apply this methodology in a large-scale empirical study using our framework, Time Series Augmented Generation (TSAG), where an LLM agent delegates quantitative tasks to verifiable, external tools. Our benchmark, consisting of 100 financial questions, is used to compare multiple SOTA agents (e.g., GPT-4o, Llama 3, Qwen2) on metrics assessing tool selection accuracy, faithfulness, and hallucination. The results demonstrate that capable agents can achieve near-perfect tool-use accuracy with minimal hallucination, validating the tool-augmented paradigm. Our primary contribution is this evaluation framework and the corresponding empirical insights into agent performance, which we release publicly to foster standardized research on reliable financial AI.