MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401759234 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17080377

Estimating Volatility of Saudi Stock Market Using Hybrid Dynamic Evolving Neural Fuzzy Inference System Models

2024· article· en· W4401759234 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nawaf N. Hamadneh, Jamil J. Jaber, Saratha Sathasivam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock marketEconometricsVolatility (finance)InferenceAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemComputer scienceFuzzy inference systemArtificial neural networkFuzzy inferenceFuzzy logicArtificial intelligenceEconomicsMachine learningFuzzy control systemGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the volatility risk in the KSA stock market (Tadawul), with a specific focus on predicting volatility using the logarithm of the standard deviation of stock market prices (LSCP) as the output variable. To enhance volatility prediction, it proposes the combined use of the dynamic evolving neural fuzzy inference system (DENFIS) and the nonlinear spectral model, maximum overlapping discrete wavelet transform (MODWT). This study utilizes a dataset comprising 4609 observations and investigates the inputs of lag 1 of the close stock price (LCP), the natural logarithm of oil price (Loil), the natural logarithm of cost of living (LCL), and the interbank rate (IB), determined through autocorrelation (AC), partial autocorrelation (PAC), correlation, and Granger causality tests. Regression analysis reveals significant effects of variables on LSCP: LCP has a negative effect, and Loil has a positive effect in the ordinary least square (OLS) model, while LCL and IB have positive effects in the fixed effect model and negative effects in the random effect model. The MODWT-Haar-DENFIS model was developed as we found that the model has the potential to be an effective model for stock market forecasting. The results provide valuable insights for investors and policymakers, aiding in risk management, investment decisions, and the development of measures to mitigate stock market volatility.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207