Financial Audit Assistance using Misinformation Detection and Explanation

Authors: Kshitij Madhav Jadhav, Sushodhan Vaishampayan, Manoj Apte, Sachin Pawar, Nitin Ramrakhiyani, Girish Keshav Palshikar

Abstract: Financial statements (FS) such as Balance Sheet (BS), Income Statement (IS) and Cash-flow Statement (CS) summarize the annual financial performance of a company. FS are widely used for evaluating corporate governance, credit appraisal, risk analysis, validate taxation, make investment decisions etc. Financial auditing is a complex and knowledge-intensive discipline whose one important aim is ensur… ▽ More Financial statements (FS) such as Balance Sheet (BS), Income Statement (IS) and Cash-flow Statement (CS) summarize the annual financial performance of a company. FS are widely used for evaluating corporate governance, credit appraisal, risk analysis, validate taxation, make investment decisions etc. Financial auditing is a complex and knowledge-intensive discipline whose one important aim is ensuring integrity, accuracy, fairness and absence of material misstatement in the published FS. Given the importance of FS, there are incentives to hide, omit or falsify information to misrepresent the true financial health of the company; e.g., reduce tax liabilities, or increase investor confidence. Given the complex, time-consuming and expertise-dependent nature of auditing, auditors would benefit from an AI-assisted system that automatically detects instances of misinformation in the given FS and identify likely sources of this misinformation in the financial data. In this paper, we present unsupervised techniques to identify misinformation in FS, and also generate explanations as to the financial variables that are likely sources of misinformation. The auditor can then explore in more detail the associated data sources and business processes to validate these suggestions. A crucial feature of our approach is the use of past corpus of FS and associated audit reports to generate insights, which help in providing assistance. We demonstrate the efficacy of these techniques on a large corpus of 11,460 FS over 5 years and associated audit reports. This paper integrates and adds more novel contributions over the previously reported research (Shinde et al., 2022)\cite{SVAP22}, (Vaishampayan et al., 2022)\cite{VSPP22}, (Pawar et al., 2023)\cite{PAPV23}, which we have used as the foundation for our AI-assisted Auditor Assistance system. △ Less

Submitted 20 July, 2026; originally announced July 2026.

Beyond Code Snippets: Benchmarking LLMs on Repository-Level Question Answering

Authors: Yoseph Berhanu Alebachew, Hunter Leary, Swanand Vaishampayan, Chris Brown

Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities across software engineering tasks, including question answering (QA). However, most studies and benchmarks focus on isolated functions or single-file snippets, overlooking the challenges of real-world program comprehension, which often spans multiple files and system-level dependencies. In this work, we introduce StackRepoQA, the firs… ▽ More Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities across software engineering tasks, including question answering (QA). However, most studies and benchmarks focus on isolated functions or single-file snippets, overlooking the challenges of real-world program comprehension, which often spans multiple files and system-level dependencies. In this work, we introduce StackRepoQA, the first multi-project, repository-level question answering dataset constructed from 1,318 real developer questions and accepted answers across 134 open-source Java projects. Using this dataset, we systematically evaluate two widely used LLMs (Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT-4o) under both direct prompting and agentic configurations. We compare baseline performance with retrieval-augmented generation methods that leverage file-level retrieval and graph-based representations of structural dependencies. Our results show that LLMs achieve moderate accuracy at baseline, with performance improving when structural signals are incorporated. Nonetheless, overall accuracy remains limited for repository-scale comprehension. The analysis reveals that high scores often result from verbatim reproduction of Stack Overflow answers rather than genuine reasoning. To our knowledge, this is the first empirical study to provide such evidence in repository-level QA. We release StackRepoQA to encourage further research into benchmarks, evaluation protocols, and augmentation strategies that disentangle memorization from reasoning, advancing LLMs as reliable tool for repository-scale program comprehension. △ Less

Submitted 3 April, 2026; v1 submitted 27 March, 2026; originally announced March 2026.

Eliciting Truthful Feedback for Preference-Based Learning via the VCG Mechanism

Authors: Leo Landolt, Anna Maddux, Andreas Schlaginhaufen, Saurabh Vaishampayan, Maryam Kamgarpour

Abstract: We study resource allocation problems in which a central planner allocates resources among strategic agents with private cost functions in order to minimize a social cost, defined as an aggregate of the agents' costs. This setting poses two main challenges: (i) the agents' cost functions may be unknown to them or difficult to specify explicitly, and (ii) agents may misreport their costs strategica… ▽ More We study resource allocation problems in which a central planner allocates resources among strategic agents with private cost functions in order to minimize a social cost, defined as an aggregate of the agents' costs. This setting poses two main challenges: (i) the agents' cost functions may be unknown to them or difficult to specify explicitly, and (ii) agents may misreport their costs strategically. To address these challenges, we propose an algorithm that combines preference-based learning with Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG) payments to incentivize truthful reporting. Our algorithm selects informative preference queries via D-optimal design, estimates cost parameters through maximum likelihood, and computes VCG allocations and payments based on these estimates. In a one-shot setting, we prove that the mechanism is approximately truthful, individually rational, and efficient up to an error of $\tilde{\mathcal O}(K^{-1/2})$ for $K$ preference queries per agent. In an online setting, these guarantees hold asymptotically with sublinear regret at a rate of $\tilde{\mathcal O}(T^{2/3})$ after $T$ rounds. Finally, we validate our approach through a numerical case study on demand response in local electricity markets. △ Less

Submitted 18 March, 2026; v1 submitted 20 October, 2025; originally announced October 2025.

Towards Evidence-Based Tech Hiring Pipelines

Authors: Chris Brown, Swanand Vaishampayan

Abstract: Software engineers are responsible for developing, maintaining, and innovating software. To hire software engineers, organizations employ a tech hiring pipeline. This process typically consists of a series of steps to evaluate the extent to which applicants meet job requirements and can effectively contribute to a development team -- such as resume screenings and technical interviews. However, res… ▽ More Software engineers are responsible for developing, maintaining, and innovating software. To hire software engineers, organizations employ a tech hiring pipeline. This process typically consists of a series of steps to evaluate the extent to which applicants meet job requirements and can effectively contribute to a development team -- such as resume screenings and technical interviews. However, research highlights substantial flaws with current tech hiring practices -- such as bias from stress-inducing assessments. As the landscape of software engineering (SE) is dramatically changing, assessing the technical proficiency and abilities of software engineers is an increasingly crucial task to meet technological needs and demands. In this paper, we outline challenges in current hiring practices and present future directions to promote fair and evidence-based evaluations in tech hiring pipelines. Our vision aims to enhance outcomes for candidates and assessments for employers to enhance the workforce in the tech industry. △ Less

Submitted 8 April, 2025; originally announced April 2025.