Trend Prediction Classification for High Frequency Bitcoin Time Series with Deep Learning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We provide a trend prediction classification framework named the random sampling method (RSM) for cryptocurrency time series that are non-stationary. This framework is based on deep learning (DL). We compare the performance of our approach to two classical baseline methods in the case of the prediction of unstable Bitcoin prices in the OkCoin market and show that the baseline approaches are easily biased by class imbalance, whereas our model mitigates this problem. We also show that the classification performance of our method expressed as the F-measure substantially exceeds the odds of a uniform random process with three outcomes, proving that extraction of deterministic patterns for trend classification, and hence market prediction, is possible to some degree. The profit rates based on RSM outperformed those based on LSTM, although they did not exceed those of the buy-and-hold strategy within the testing data period, and thus do not provide a basis for algorithmic trading.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it