MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161024837 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v2n1p51

Financial Volatility Forecasting by Least Square Support Vector Machine Based on GARCH, EGARCH and GJR Models: Evidence from ASEAN Stock Markets

2010· article· en· W2161024837 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut de Mathématiques de Toulouse
KeywordsAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityLeverage effectVolatility (finance)Support vector machineEconometricsStock (firearms)Financial marketEconomicsStock marketLeverage (statistics)Financial economicsComputer scienceFinanceArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we aim at comparing semi-parametric method, LSSVM (Least square support vector machine), with the classical GARCH(1,1), EGARCH(1,1) and GJR(1,1) models to forecast financial volatilities of three major ASEAN stock markets. More precisely, the experimental results suggest that using hybrid models, GARCH-LSSVM, EGARCH-LSSVM and GJR-LSSVM provides improved performances in forecasting the leverage effect volatilities, especially during the recently global financial market crashes in 2008.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.239 · 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