Intraday Market Predictability: A Machine Learning Approach
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
Abstract Conducting, to our knowledge, the largest study ever of 5-min equity market returns using state-of-the-art machine learning models trained on the cross-section of lagged market index constituent returns, we show that regularized linear models and nonlinear tree-based models yield significant market return predictability. Ensemble models perform the best across time and their predictability translates into economically significant Sharpe ratios of 0.98 after transaction costs. These results provide strong evidence that intraday market returns are predictable during short time horizons, beyond what can be explained by transaction costs. Furthermore, we show that constituent returns hold significant predictive information that is not contained in market returns or in price trend and liquidity characteristics. Consistent with the hypothesis that predictability is driven by slow-moving trader capital, predictability decreased post-decimalization, and market returns are more predictable during the middle of the day, on days with high volatility or illiquidity, and in financial crisis periods.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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