MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183188052 · doi:10.1089/big.2020.0391

A Long Short-Term Memory Network Stock Price Prediction with Leading Indicators

2021· article· en· W3183188052 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

VenueBig Data · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock (firearms)Stock marketFutures contractEconometricsVolatility (finance)Stock market bubbleEconomicsFinancial economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accuracy of the prediction of stock price fluctuations is crucial for investors, and it helps investors manage funds better when formulating trading strategies. Using forecasting tools to get a predicted value that is closer to the actual value from a given financial data set has always been a major goal of financial researchers and a problem. In recent years, people have paid particular attention to stocks, and gradually used various tools to predict stock prices. There is more than one factor that affects financial trends, and people need to consider it from all aspects, so research on stock price fluctuations has also become extremely difficult. This paper mainly studies the impact of leading indicators on the stock market. The framework used in this article is proposed based on long short-term memory (LSTM). In this study, leading indicators that affect stock market volatility are added, and the proposed framework is thus named as a stock tending prediction framework based on LSTM with leading indicators (LSTMLI). This study uses stock markets in the United States and Taiwan, respectively, with historical data, futures, and options as data sets to predict stock prices in these two markets. We measure the predictive performance of LSTMLI relative to other neural network models, and the impact of leading indicators on stock prices is studied. Besides, when using LSTMLI to predict the rise and fall of stock prices in the article, the conventional regression method is not used, but the classification method is used, which can give a qualitative output based on the data set. The experimental results show that the LSTMLI model using the classification method can effectively reduce the prediction error. Also, the data set with leading indicators is better than the prediction results of the single historical data using the LSTMLI model.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.121 · 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