Opening the Black Box of Financial AI with CLEAR-Trade: A CLass-Enhanced Attentive Response Approach for Explaining and Visualizing Deep Learning-Driven Stock Market Prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep learning has been shown to outperform traditional machinelearning algorithms across a wide range of problem domains. However,current deep learning algorithms have been criticized as uninterpretable"black-boxes" which cannot explain their decision makingprocesses. This is a major shortcoming that prevents the widespreadapplication of deep learning to domains with regulatoryprocesses such as finance. As such, industries such as financehave to rely on traditional models like decision trees that are muchmore interpretable but less effective than deep learning for complexproblems. In this paper, we propose CLEAR-Trade, a novelfinancial AI visualization framework for deep learning-driven stockmarket prediction that mitigates the interpretability issue of deeplearning methods. In particular, CLEAR-Trade provides a effectiveway to visualize and explain decisions made by deep stock marketprediction models. We show the efficacy of CLEAR-Trade in enhancingthe interpretability of stock market prediction by conductingexperiments based on S&P 500 stock index prediction. The resultsdemonstrate that CLEAR-Trade can provide significant insightinto the decision-making process of deep learning-driven financialmodels, particularly for regulatory processes, thus improving theirpotential uptake in the financial industry.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".