MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320500423 · doi:10.2991/978-94-6463-042-8_56

How Machine Learning Methods Unravel the Mystery of Bitcoin Price Predictions

2023· book-chapter· en· W4320500423 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in computer science research · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceSupport vector machinePredictive powerCryptocurrencyTerm (time)Range (aeronautics)EngineeringComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning has a wide range of applications to meet the complexity of data and various expectations for prediction types.In this study, a comprehensive review of various machine learning approaches for Bitcoin price prediction will be proposed.After examining previous research on cryptocurrency prediction using Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM), Multi-layer Perceptions (MLP), and Support Vector Machine (SVM), with the focus on LSTM, it can be found that LSTM is a widely employed method in Bitcoin price prediction because of its advantages in incorporating both long-term and short-term dependencies.This paper reviews a series of research papers by comparing the differences between the methods they implemented, to a limited extent, based on their predictive power, replicability, and model limitations.Furthermore, some potential improvements and explored innovations for future studies also be discussed.

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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.326 · 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