Prediction of Stock Market Index Movement by Ten Data Mining Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ability to predict direction of stock/index price accurately is crucial for market dealers or investors to maximize their profits. Data mining techniques have been successfully shown to generate high forecasting accuracy of stock price movement. Nowadays, in stead of a single method, traders need to use various forecasting techniques to gain multiple signals and more information about the future of the markets. In this paper, ten different techniques of data mining are discussed and applied to predict price movement of Hang Seng index of Hong Kong stock market. The approaches include Linear discriminant analysis (LDA), Quadratic discriminant analysis (QDA), K-nearest neighbor classification, Naïve Bayes based on kernel estimation, Logit model, Tree based classification, neural network, Bayesian classification with Gaussian process, Support vector machine (SVM) and Least squares support vector machine (LS-SVM). Experimental results show that the SVM and LS-SVM generate superior predictive performances among the other models. Specifically, SVM is better than LS-SVM for in-sample prediction but LS-SVM is, in turn, better than the SVM for the out-of-sample forecasts in term of hit rate and error rate criteria.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".