MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168920005 · doi:10.1145/1569901.1570096

Multi-objective optimization with an evolutionary artificial neural network for financial forecasting

2009· article· en· W2168920005 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceCrossoverArtificial intelligenceBackpropagationGenetic algorithmMacroMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we attempt to make accurate predictions of the movement of the stock market with the aid of an evolutionary artificial neural network (EANN). To facilitate this objective we constructed an EANN for multi-objective optimization (MOO) that was trained with macro-economic data and its effect on market performance. Experiments were conducted with EANNs that updated connection weights through genetic operators (crossover and mutation) and/or with the aid of back-propagation. The results showed that the optimal performance was achieved under natural complexification of the EANN and that back-propagation tended to over fit the data. The results also suggested that EANNs trained with multi-objectives were more robust than that of a single optimization approach. The MOO approach produced superior investment returns during training and testing over a single objective optimization (SOO).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207