Predicting S&P500 Index direction with Transfer Learning and a Causal Graph as main Input.
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 propose a unified multi-tasking framework to represent the complex and uncertain causal process of financial market dynamics, and then to predict the movement of any type of index with an application on the monthly direction of the S&P500 index. our solution is based on three main pillars: (i) the use of transfer learning to share knowledge and feature (representation, learning) between all financial markets, increase the size of the training sample and preserve the stability between training, validation and test sample. (ii) The combination of multidisciplinary knowledge (Financial economics, behavioral finance, market microstructure and portfolio construction theories) to represent a global top-down dynamics of any financial market, through a graph. (iii) The integration of forward looking unstructured data, different types of contexts (long, medium and short term) through latent variables/nodes and then, use a unique VAE network (parameter sharing) to learn simultaneously their distributional representation. We obtain Accuracy, F1-score, and Matthew Correlation of 74.3 %, 67 % and 0.42 above the industry and other benchmark on 12 years test period which include three unstable and difficult sub-period to predict.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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