MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397697220

Convexity-Concavity Indicators and Automated Trading Strategies Based on Gradient Boosted Classification Trees Models

2016· article· en· W2397697220 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrough (economics)ConvexitySharpe ratioTerm (time)Trading strategyEconometricsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceStock marketFinancial economicsMathematicsEconomicsGeologyPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses the visibility and invisibility algorithms to build the peak and trough indicators, providing a way to recognize the convexity, concavity and regime change of the CSI 300 Index from the April 8, 2005 to June 30, 2016. The study found that the automated trading rules discovered by the gradient boosted classification trees models derived from the peak indicator outperform that from the trough indicator. Due to the long-term bubble regime in the Chinese stock market, the technical trading rules in general have a better short term predictive ability than long term, in terms of the values of Sharpe Ratio and PnL/MD obtained from the whole out-of-sample.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207