Novel modelling strategies for high-frequency stock trading data
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
Full electronic automation in stock exchanges has recently become popular, generating high-frequency intraday data and motivating the development of near real-time price forecasting methods. Machine learning algorithms are widely applied to mid-price stock predictions. Processing raw data as inputs for prediction models (e.g., data thinning and feature engineering) can primarily affect the performance of the prediction methods. However, researchers rarely discuss this topic. This motivated us to propose three novel modelling strategies for processing raw data. We illustrate how our novel modelling strategies improve forecasting performance by analyzing high-frequency data of the Dow Jones 30 component stocks. In these experiments, our strategies often lead to statistically significant improvement in predictions. The three strategies improve the F1 scores of the SVM models by 0.056, 0.087, and 0.016, respectively. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40854-022-00431-9.
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 | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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