arXiv · 2609.28090
Can LLMs Catch a Rigged Backtest? A Clean-Control Calibration Benchmark
Abstract
Backtest auditing is a calibration problem: high flaw recall is not useful when the model falsely flags matched clean strategies. We build a 96-item paired benchmark in which every flawed backtest has a clean control that holds strategy, dates, code style, labels, and reporting scaffold fixed while changing one methodology detail. A deterministic scorer separates flaw recall, clean-control false positives, evidence localization, and fix relevance. Over 1440 cached audits from four text endpoints, the primary DeepSeek auditor reaches 100.0\% closed and clean-aware code recall, but open prompts over-flag 93.8\% of clean code controls, and clean-aware all-three specificity is 87.5\% even where recall saturates. A clean-aware warning drops DeepSeek code false positives from 20.8\% (95\% CI 11.7--34.3) to 0.0\% (0.0--7.4) at unchanged recall, while the budget anchor still flags 38/48 clean controls under the same prompt. Reporting recall alone would rank three of these four models identically; reporting the clean-control rate separates them by 79 points.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Makar Ulesov, Vladislav Smirnov, Omar Ibrahim, Arsenii Bobovnikov. 2026-09-23. Can LLMs Catch a Rigged Backtest? A Clean-Control Calibration Benchmark. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.28090
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.