MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232150802 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14648826.v1

Prediction of stock switching points by financial news

2021· preprint· en· W4232150802 on OpenAlexaff
Saeede Sadat Asadi Kakhki

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock (firearms)Latent Dirichlet allocationComputer scienceEconometricsBayesian probabilityData miningArtificial intelligenceEconomicsTopic modelGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to detect stock switching points from historical stock data and analyze corresponding financial news to predict upcoming stock switching points. Various change point detection methods have been investigated in the literature, such as online bayesian change point detection technique. Prediction of stock changing points using financial news has been implemented by different types of text mining techniques. In this study, online bayesian change point detection is implemented to detect stock switching points from historical stock data. Relevant news to detected change points are retrieved in the past and Latent Dirichlet Allocation technique is used to learn the hidden structures in the news data. Unseen news are then transferred to the trained topic representation. Similarity of relevant news and unseen news are used for prediction of future stock change points. Results show that stock switching points can be detected by historical stock data with better performance comparing to random guessing. It is possible to predict stock switching points by only fraction of financial news and with good result in terms of common performance metrics. According to this research, traders can take advantage of financial news to enhance prediction of future stock switching points.

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 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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207