# Evaluating Large Language Models for Forced Outage Risk Prediction: Benefits and Comparison to Machine Learning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.04272 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.04272/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 19 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models Are Zero-Shot Time Series Forecasters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.07820/) (2023)
- [Empowering Power Outage Prediction with Spatially Aware Hybrid Graph Neural Networks and Contrastive Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.04916/) (2026)
- [How Unlikely Is "Unlikely"? Assessing Verbal Probability Perception Across Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.26327/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This study examines the ability of large language models (LLMs) to predict the risk of weather-related forced outages in the distribution grid in a zero-shot framework, without labeled training data. The problem is formulated as a binary severity classification task across three forecast horizons (3h, 6h, 12h), using six years of outage records and high-resolution weather data for a utility service area in central Texas. Four zero-shot LLMs are benchmarked against two supervised classifiers across two input configurations: one using current weather observations and the other using weather forecast data. Results show that supervised models outperform LLMs on macro-F1 and precision, while newer LLM generations achieve competitive scores. Beyond accuracy, LLMs offer complementary strengths in actionable reasoning and geographic scalability, suggesting that combining them with supervised models may be the best practice.