Using artificial intelligence techniques and econometrics model for crypto-price prediction
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
In today's financial landscape, individuals face challenges when it comes to determining the most effective investment strategies. Cryptocurrencies have emerged as a recent and enticing option for investment. This paper focuses on forecasting the price of Ethereum using two distinct methods: artificial intelligence (AI)-based methods like Genetic Algorithms (GA), and econometric models such as regression analysis and time series models. The study incorporates economic indicators such as Crude Oil Prices and the Federal Funds Effective Rate, as well as global indices like the Dow Jones Industrial Average and Standard and Poor's 500, as input variables for prediction. To achieve accurate predictions for Ethereum's price one day ahead, we develop a hybrid algorithm combining Genetic Algorithms (GA) and Artificial Neural Networks (ANN). Furthermore, regression analysis serves as an additional prediction tool. Additionally, we employ the Autoregressive Moving Average (ARMA) model to assess the relationships between variables (dependent and independent variables). To evaluate the performance of our chosen methods, we utilize daily historical data encompassing economic and global indices from the beginning of 2019 until the end of 2021. The results demonstrate the superiority of AI-based approaches over econometric methods in terms of predictability, as evidenced by lower loss functions and increased accuracy. Moreover, our findings suggest that the AI approach enhances computational speed while maintaining accuracy and minimizing errors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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