Stock Market Analysis and Prediction Using LSTM
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
Even for professionals and analysts, predicting the value of stocks has proved to be a challenging endeavor. Because they shed light on the expected future path of the stock market, accurate prediction systems for the stock market are beneficial to traders, investors, and analysts. This is because traders, investors, and analysts can better anticipate the market's behavior. The increase in available choices for financial investments has contributed to the complexity and unpredictability of the stock market. The goal of this project is to develop a model that could precisely depicting the market’s complexity as well as its high degree of volatility. The long short-term memory (LSTM) architecture of a neural network was implemented in this study to estimate Apple's next day closing price throughout the preceding decade. To forecast how the stock market will behave, its six fundamental indicators are integrated in a logical and well-balanced way. These indicators account for fundamental market data, macroeconomic data, and technical indications.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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