MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394788938 · doi:10.30574/wjarr.2024.22.1.1052

A survey on cryptocurrency price prediction

2024· article· en· W4394788938 on OpenAlexaff
S. Venkatesh, B Rashmitha, S Manjunadha, Md Junaid

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptocurrencyAutoregressive integrated moving averageAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityComputer scienceArtificial neural networkCurrencyVolatility (finance)Digital currencyEconometricsDeep learningCashStock marketArtificial intelligenceEconomicsMachine learningTime seriesFinanceComputer securityMonetary economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A type of digital currency known as a cryptocurrency allows all transactions to be completed online. There is no hard cash version of this soft currency. We highlight that a decentralized currency differs from a centralized currency in the any user of a virtual currency can purchase services without the need for third parties to get involved. Due to its extreme price volatility, using these cryptocurrencies has an impact on trade and international relations. Moreover, the constantly fluctuating oscillations indicate the urgent need for a more precise method of predicting this price. Deep learning techniques that use effective learning models for training data, including the LSTM, GRU, and Feedback Neural Network, can be used to do this. Benchmark datasets are used to test the suggested strategy. That brings us to the neural network, one of the clever data mining technologies that researchers in many domains have been using for the past ten years. In the current economy, stock market data is essential. There are two types of forecasting methodologies: nonlinear models (ARCH, GARCH, Neural Network) and linear models (AR, MA, ARIMA, ARMA). To forecast a company's stock price based on past prices, we employed the Box Jenkins Model also known as ARIMA, and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), and Feedback Neural Network also known as RNN.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.384
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Advanced Research and ReviewsSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207