MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Forecasting Nonlinear Crude Oil Futures Prices

2006· article· en· W3125080556 on OpenAlexaff
Saeed Moshiri, Faezeh Foroutan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Energy Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFutures contractNonlinear systemEconometricsAutoregressive integrated moving averageBrent CrudeCrude oilLinear modelAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityCorrelation dimensionSeries (stratigraphy)Artificial neural networkEconomicsEconometric modelComputer scienceTime seriesDimension (graph theory)Curse of dimensionalityMathematicsFinancial economicsVolatility (finance)Artificial intelligenceFractal dimensionMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The movements in oil prices are very complex and, therefore, seem to be unpredictable. However, one of the main challenges facing econometric models is to forecast such seemingly unpredictable economic series. Traditional linear structural models have not been promising when used for oil price forecasting. Although linear and nonlinear time series models have performed much better in forecasting oil prices, there is still room for improvement. If the data generating process is nonlinear, applying linear models could result in large forecast errors. Model specification in nonlinear modeling, however, can be very case dependent and time-consuming. In this paper, we model and forecast daily crude oil futures prices from 1983 to 2003, listed in NYMEX, applying ARIMA and GARCH models. We then test for chaos using embedding dimension, BDS(L), Lyapunov exponent, and neural networks tests. Finally, we set up a nonlinear and flexible ANN model to forecast the series. Since the test results indicate that crude oil futures prices follow a complex nonlinear dynamic process, we expect that the ANN model will improve forecasting accuracy. A comparison of the results of the forecasts among different models confirms that this is indeed the case.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations179
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Energy JournalSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207