MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286111269 · doi:10.30537/sjcms.v6i1.1027

Hybrid BRNN-ARIMA Model for Financial Time Series Forecasting

2022· article· en· W4286111269 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Najamuddin, Samreen Fatima

Bibliographic record

VenueSukkur IBA Journal of Computing and Mathematical Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoregressive integrated moving averageExchange rateTime seriesEconometricsComputer scienceSETARStability (learning theory)Series (stratigraphy)Bayesian probabilityAutoregressive modelRandom walkFinanceStatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEconomicsMachine learningSTAR model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accurate forecasting of time series is difficult and for exchange rate more difficult as well. Because it is difficult to predict as they continuously fluctuate during trading hours. Exchange rate forecasting plays a vital financial problem in recent era. It is extensively acknowledged that exchange rate stability implies that macroeconomic stability. In this study, a hybrid model is proposed to forecast exchange rates. Bayesian regularized neural network (BRNN) model is assembled with Autoregressive integrated moving average model (ARIMA) and develop hybrid BRNN-ARIMA model. Furthermore, the comparison of proposed hybrid model has been done with standalone BRNN, standalone ARIMA and random walk model. Quarterly exchange rate data from 1970Q1 to 2021Q2 of six countries comprises developed (UK, Canada, and Singapore) and developing (Pakistan, India, and Malaysia) are forecast. To evaluate the performance of these models RMSE, MAE and MAPE are applied. The results indicate that the proposed hybrid BRNN-ARIMA model outperforms the other studied model in forecasting exchange rates.

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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSukkur IBA Journal of Computing and Mathematical SciencesSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207