MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012468412 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v2n3p170

Predicting Future Depositor`s Rate of Return Applying Neural Network: A Case-study of Indonesian Islamic Bank

2010· article· en· W2012468412 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saiful Anwar, Kenji Watanabe

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy Prediction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExchange rateCirculation (fluid dynamics)EconometricsArtificial neural networkCertificateInflation (cosmology)IndonesianInterest rateCurrencyComputer scienceEconomicsFinanceMonetary economicsArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Islamic bank has to perform well in order to deliver better return in compensating depositor`s money. This paper is conducted to identify the relative significance assigned to macroeconomics variables for maximizing depositor’s opportunity. Furthermore, it becomes very necessary to have a prediction of future rate of return to get a clear picture in making deposit decision. This research uses some key macroeconomic variables such as; Jakarta Stock Indices (JSI), inflation rate (INFR), central bank`s interest rate certificate (INTR), exchange rate (ER), and money in circulation (MIC). Since these variables are characterized as nonlinearities time series data, Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) is employed using back propagation algorithm as learning algorithm. From observation resulted that central bank’s interest rate certificate (INTR) and Money In Circulation (MIC) could be used as leading indicators to face the problem with 94.95% accuracy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicFinancial Distress and Bankruptcy PredictionFrench-language works237,207