MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400698552 · doi:10.1186/s40854-024-00637-z

Deep learning systems for forecasting the prices of crude oil and precious metals

2024· article· en· W4400698552 on OpenAlexaff
Parisa Foroutan, Salim Lahmiri

Bibliographic record

VenueFinancial Innovation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrude oilPrecious metalDeep learningEconomicsPetroleum engineeringNatural resource economicsEconometricsMonetary economicsEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeologyMetallurgyMaterials scienceMetal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Commodity markets, such as crude oil and precious metals, play a strategic role in the economic development of nations, with crude oil prices influencing geopolitical relations and the global economy. Moreover, gold and silver are argued to hedge the stock and cryptocurrency markets during market downsides. Therefore, accurate forecasting of crude oil and precious metals prices is critical. Nevertheless, due to the nonlinear nature, substantial fluctuations, and irregular cycles of crude oil and precious metals, predicting their prices is a challenging task. Our study contributes to the commodity market price forecasting literature by implementing and comparing advanced deep-learning models. We address this gap by including silver alongside gold in our analysis, offering a more comprehensive understanding of the precious metal markets. This research expands existing knowledge and provides valuable insights into predicting commodity prices. In this study, we implemented 16 deep- and machine-learning models to forecast the daily price of the West Texas Intermediate (WTI), Brent, gold, and silver markets. The employed deep-learning models are long short-term memory (LSTM), BiLSTM, gated recurrent unit (GRU), bidirectional gated recurrent units (BiGRU), T2V-BiLSTM, T2V-BiGRU, convolutional neural networks (CNN), CNN-BiLSTM, CNN-BiGRU, temporal convolutional network (TCN), TCN-BiLSTM, and TCN-BiGRU. We compared the forecasting performance of deep-learning models with the baseline random forest, LightGBM, support vector regression, and k-nearest neighborhood models using mean absolute error (MAE), mean absolute percentage error, and root mean squared error as evaluation criteria. By considering different sliding window lengths, we examine the forecasting performance of our models. Our results reveal that the TCN model outperforms the others for WTI, Brent, and silver, achieving the lowest MAE values of 1.444, 1.295, and 0.346, respectively. The BiGRU model performs best for gold, with an MAE of 15.188 using a 30-day input sequence. Furthermore, LightGBM exhibits comparable performance to TCN and is the best-performing machine-learning model overall. These findings are critical for investors, policymakers, mining companies, and governmental agencies to effectively anticipate market trends, mitigate risk, manage uncertainty, and make timely decisions and strategies regarding crude oil, gold, and silver markets.

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)0.002
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations56
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFinancial InnovationSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207