Discovering material information using hierarchical Reformer model on financial regulatory filings
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
Most applications of machine learning for finance are related to forecasting tasks for investment decisions. Instead, we aim to promote a better understanding of financial markets with machine learning techniques. Leveraging the tremendous progress in deep learning models for natural language processing, we construct a hierarchical Reformer ([15]) model capable of processing a large document level dataset, SEDAR, from canadian financial regulatory filings. Using this model, we show that it is possible to predict trade volume changes using regulatory filings. We adapt the pretraining task of HiBERT ([36]) to obtain good sentence level representations using a large unlabelled document dataset. Finetuning the model to successfully predict trade volume changes indicates that the model captures a view from financial markets and processing regulatory filings is beneficial. Analyzing the attention patterns of our model reveals that it is able to detect some indications of material information without explicit training, which is highly relevant for investors and also for the market surveillance mandate of financial regulators.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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