MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386988846 · doi:10.3905/jfds.2023.1.138

RIFT: Pretraining and Applications for Representations of Interrelated Financial Time Series

2023· article· en· W4386988846 on OpenAlexaff
Alik Sokolov, Joshua Kim, Brydon Parker, Benjamin Fattori, Luis Seco

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Financial Data Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPairwise comparisonPortfolio optimizationComputer sciencePortfolioAutoencoderArtificial intelligenceRepresentation (politics)Machine learningEncoderArtificial neural networkEconometricsFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article introduces a new financial time-series representation model called representations of interrelated financial time series (RIFT). RIFT combines a novel pretraining task and neural network architecture to create generalized representations of multiple financial time-series inputs. The network uses a Siamese architecture to predict pairwise future correlations of securities; the encoder can then be used to create representations of individual securities for downstream tasks. Similar to successful applications of transfer learning in other domains, the authors test the representations on several downstream tasks common in quantitative finance, including dimensionality reduction, portfolio optimization, and portfolio reconstruction. In particular, the article introduces neural hierarchical risk parity (HRP), an improvement on the HRP algorithm, the current state of the art for portfolio optimization, and shows promising results across a variety of assessment criteria, including a 6.0% relative improvement in annualized returns and a 5.6% relative improvement in the Sharpe ratio.

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 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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Financial Data ScienceSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207