MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Novel Algorithmic Trading Strategy using Hidden Markov Model for Kalman Filtering Innovations

2021· article· en· W3199032028 on OpenAlexaff
Ethan Johnson-Skinner, You Liang, Na Yu, Alin Morariu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHidden Markov modelTrading strategyKalman filterComputer sciencePairs tradeAlgorithmic tradingVolatility (finance)Statistical arbitragePairwise comparisonHigh-frequency tradingEconometricsMarkov chainMachine learningArtificial intelligenceData miningFinancial economicsAlternative trading systemEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of algorithmic trading has been one of the most prominent trends in finance and its applications. Hidden Markov Models (HMMs) help enhance the predictive power of statistical models and improve trading strategies for data scientists and algorithmic traders. In recent years there has been growing interest in investigating the pairs trading and multiple trading based on robust Kalman filtering (KF) using data-driven innovation volatility forecasts (DDIVF). KF algorithms were successfully applied in pairs trading with two cointegrated assets using DDIVF as a method for forecasting non-normal innovation volatility. In this paper a novel combined pairwise trading strategy is proposed by combining HMM and DDIVF to further optimize trading signals in different market regimes. The results of the numerical experiments on two cointegrated stocks show that the proposed profitable trading strategy using DDIVF-HMM outperforms the recently studied robust trading strategy using DDIVF alone.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.351
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.097 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207