MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323907046 · doi:10.3934/era.2023135

Systemic risk prediction based on Savitzky-Golay smoothing and temporal convolutional networks

2023· article· en· W4323907046 on OpenAlexaff
Xite Yang, Ankang Zou, Jidi Cao, Yongzeng Lai, Jilin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronic Research Archive · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkBinary Golay codeComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSmoothingAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the data from January 2007 to December 2021, this paper selects 14 representatives from four levels of the extreme risk of financial institutions, the contagion effect between financial systems, volatility and instability of financial markets, liquidity, and credit risk systemic risk. By constructing a Savitzky-Golay-TCN deep convolutional neural network, the systemic risk indicators of China's financial market are predicted, and their accuracy and reliability are analyzed. The research found that: 1) Savitzky-Golay-TCN deep convolutional neural network has a strong generalization ability, and the prediction effect on all indices is stable. 2) Compared with the three control models (time-series convolutional network (TCN), convolutional neural network (CNN), and long short-term memory (LSTM)), the Savitzky-Golay-TCN deep convolutional neural network has excellent prediction accuracy, and its average prediction accuracy for all indices has increased. 3) Savitzky-Golay-TCN deep convolutional neural network can better monitor financial market changes and effectively predict systemic risk.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.318 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronic Research ArchiveSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207