MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398243663 · doi:10.1108/ajeb-01-2024-0007

Wholesale price forecasts of green grams using the neural network

2024· article· en· W4398243663 on OpenAlexaff
Bingzi Jin, Xiaojie Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Economics and Banking · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceEconometricsEconomicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Agriculture commodity price forecasts have long been important for a variety of market players. The study we conducted aims to address this difficulty by examining the weekly wholesale price index of green grams in the Chinese market. The index covers a ten-year period, from January 1, 2010, to January 3, 2020, and has significant economic implications. Design/methodology/approach In order to address the nonlinear patterns present in the price time series, we investigate the nonlinear auto-regressive neural network as the forecast model. This modeling technique is able to combine a variety of basic nonlinear functions to approximate more complex nonlinear characteristics. Specifically, we examine prediction performance that corresponds to several configurations across data splitting ratios, hidden neuron and delay counts, and model estimation approaches. Findings Our model turns out to be rather simple and yields forecasts with good stability and accuracy. Relative root mean square errors throughout training, validation and testing are specifically 4.34, 4.71 and 3.98%, respectively. The results of benchmark research show that the neural network produces statistically considerably better performance when compared to other machine learning models and classic time-series econometric methods. Originality/value Utilizing our findings as independent technical price forecasts would be one use. Alternatively, policy research and fresh insights into price patterns might be achieved by combining them with other (basic) prediction outputs.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
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

Citations236
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of Economics and BankingSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207