MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2919351616 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33019558

Artificial Counselor System for Stock Investment

2019· article· en· W2919351616 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

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock exchangeTechnical analysisStock (firearms)Fuzzy logicPortfolioStock marketProfit (economics)Financial economicsEconometricsComputer scienceBusinessEconomicsMicroeconomicsFinanceArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a novel trading system which plays the role of an artificial counselor for stock investment. In this paper, the stock future prices (technical features) are predicted using Support Vector Regression. Thereafter, the predicted prices are used to recommend which portions of the budget an investor should invest in different existing stocks to have an optimum expected profit considering their level of risk tolerance. Two different methods are used for suggesting best portions, which are Markowitz portfolio theory and fuzzy investment counselor. The first approach is an optimization-based method which considers merely technical features, while the second approach is based on Fuzzy Logic taking into account both technical and fundamental features of the stock market. The experimental results on New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) show the effectiveness of the proposed system.

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)0.007
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.266
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.141 · 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