MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943473775 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12020076

Equalizing Seasonal Time Series Using Artificial Neural Networks in Predicting the Euro–Yuan Exchange Rate

2019· article· en· W2943473775 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkCategorical variableExchange rateSeries (stratigraphy)EconometricsTime seriesRegressionComputer scienceRegression analysisValue (mathematics)StatisticsEconomicsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exchange rate is one of the most monitored economic variables reflecting the state of the economy in the long run, while affecting it significantly in the short run. However, prediction of the exchange rate is very complicated. In this contribution, for the purposes of predicting the exchange rate, artificial neural networks are used, which have brought quality and valuable results in a number of research programs. This contribution aims to propose a methodology for considering seasonal fluctuations in equalizing time series by means of artificial neural networks on the example of Euro and Chinese Yuan. For the analysis, data on the exchange rate of these currencies per period longer than 9 years are used (3303 input data in total). Regression by means of neural networks is carried out. There are two network sets generated, of which the second one focuses on the seasonal fluctuations. Before the experiment, it had seemed that there was no reason to include categorical variables in the calculation. The result, however, indicated that additional variables in the form of year, month, day in the month, and day in the week, in which the value was measured, have brought higher accuracy and order in equalizing of the time series.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.268 · 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