A Complete VADER-Based Sentiment Analysis of Bitcoin (BTC) Tweets during the Era of COVID-19
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
During the COVID-19 pandemic, many research studies have been conducted to examine the impact of the outbreak on the financial sector, especially on cryptocurrencies. Social media, such as Twitter, plays a significant role as a meaningful indicator in forecasting the Bitcoin (BTC) prices. However, there is a research gap in determining the optimal preprocessing strategy in BTC tweets to develop an accurate machine learning prediction model for bitcoin prices. This paper develops different text preprocessing strategies for correlating the sentiment scores of Twitter text with Bitcoin prices during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explore the effect of different preprocessing functions, features, and time lengths of data on the correlation results. Out of 13 strategies, we discover that splitting sentences, removing Twitter-specific tags, or their combination generally improve the correlation of sentiment scores and volume polarity scores with Bitcoin prices. The prices only correlate well with sentiment scores over shorter timespans. Selecting the optimum preprocessing strategy would prompt machine learning prediction models to achieve better accuracy as compared to the actual prices.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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