MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090347573 · doi:10.4018/ijsds.2013100105

A Supervised Classification System of Financial Data Based on Wavelet Packet and Neural Networks

2013· article· en· W2090347573 on OpenAlexaff
Salim Lahmiri, Mounir Boukadoum, Sylvain Chartier

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackpropagationSupport vector machineComputer scienceArtificial neural networkArtificial intelligenceWaveletData miningPattern recognition (psychology)Stock market indexStock marketMachine learningData classification

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to present an automated system to classify financial data patterns as indicators of stock market future upward or downward moves. The classification system uses wavelet packet transform (WPT) for data decomposition and backpropagation neural networks (BPNN) for classification task. Its results are compared to those of a common classification system found in the literature which is based on ordinary wavelet transform (WT) and BPNN. In particular, the WPT is applied to the stock market data to obtain two categories of patterns: (i) approximation coefficients that represent major trend of the original data, and (ii) the residuals of the original data that capture its short-time variations. Therefore, those patterns are both complementary information used as inputs to classify stock market future shifts. For comparison purpose, BPNN and support vector machine (SVM) are separately used to classify patterns. Using S&P500 price index data, simulation results showed that both BPNN and SVM perform better with WPT extracted patterns (residuals and approximation coefficients) than standard approach based on WT approximation coefficients. In addition, BPNN outperform SVM. The WPT-NN based approach for financial data classification is more effective and promising than the standard approach adopted in the literature. The finding supports the adoption of the proposed classification system as an appropriate decision-making system in financial industry to classify financial data for forecasting purpose.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.341
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.100 · 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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Strategic Decision SciencesSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207