Abstract
Large language models are being organized into multi-agent systems with specialized roles, but whether such specialization produces distinct forecasts and whether subsequent synthesis improves utility remains unclear. In this study, we carried out a live, prospective evaluation over the final 56 matches of the information-dense 2026 FIFA World Cup, keeping a frontier foundation model constant while assigning two primary forecasting agents contrasting specialist roles: a quantitative specialist focusing on structured performance statistics and a news specialist focusing on current injuries, tactics and information from press conferences. Their forecasts were then reviewed by a separate critic before being combined by a meta-agent, resulting in a sequential four-agent model. Forecasts from the betting market served as an external benchmark. The news specialist obtained the highest mean probability-weighted Top-3 utility and matched the betting market in Top-3 exact-score hits. Nevertheless, the two specialist forecasters agreed on at least two of the three scorelines in 50 out of 56 matches, and the meta-agent never generated more than one scoreline outside the specialists' forecast set. These findings show that rapidly changing, unstructured information can provide a valuable forecasting signal alongside structured statistics, whereas adding critic and meta-agent stages does not necessarily create complementary information or improve on the strongest specialist.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.12495
