Cited by 89Sentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningStock Market Forecasting MethodsTopic Modeling

Designing Heterogeneous LLM Agents for Financial Sentiment Analysis

Open access
Xing, Frank·2025·ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have drastically changed the possible ways to design intelligent systems, shifting the focus from massive data acquisition and new model training to human alignment and strategic elicitation of the full potential of existing pre-trained models. This paradigm shift, however, is not fully realized in financial sentiment analysis (FSA) due to the discriminative nature of this task and a lack of prescriptive knowledge of how to leverage existing generative models in such a context. This study investigates the effectiveness of the new paradigm, that is, using LLMs without fine-tuning for FSA. Rooted in Minsky’s theory of mind and emotions, a design framework with heterogeneous LLM agents is proposed and applied to FSA. The framework instantiates specialized agents using prior guiding knowledge from both linguistics and finance. Then, a summative agent reasons on the aggregated agent discussions. Comprehensive evaluations using six FSA datasets show that the framework yields better accuracies compared to many alternative multi-LLM agent settings, especially when the discussion contents are substantial. This study contributes to the design foundations and paves new avenues for LLMs-based FSA and potentially other tasks. Implications for business and management have also been discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3688399

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A heterogeneous debating framework where LLM agents with different roles debate with each other improves news sentiment classification performance.

    “[51] proposed a heterogeneous debating framework where LLM agents with different roles (i.e. mood agent, rhetoric agent, dependency agent, etc.) debate with each other, which improves the news sentiment classification performance.”

    From Large Language Model Agent in Financial Trading: A Survey (2026) · cites this paper as [51]

  • News data from reputable sources is extensively used in various studies to stay up-to-date with the real-world financial market.

    “This type of data is extensively used in various studies [20, 27, 51, 53, 57] to stay up-to-date with the real-world financial market.”

    From Large Language Model Agent in Financial Trading: A Survey (2026) · cites this paper as [51]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xing, F.
Affiliations
National University of Singapore (SG)
Corresponding author
Xing, Frank
Venue
ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems
Published
2025-02-10
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
1-24
ISSN
  • 2158-656X (ISSN-L)
  • 2158-6578
OpenAlex
W4401545735
Cited by
88
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 17
FWCI
12.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Singapore Ministry of Education Academic Research Fund (251RES2107)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Stock Market Forecasting Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
financial sentiment analysis, large language models, multi-agent systems, domain knowledge integration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review