MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403439362 · doi:10.4236/ti.2024.154011

Applying Machine Learning Techniques to Analyze and Explore Precious Metals

2024· article· en· W4403439362 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohanned Hindi Alharbi

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Investment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the utilization of machine learning methods to predict the values of valuable metals, specifically gold, silver, palladium, and platinum, from 2017 to 2023. Accurate price prediction for these commodities is tough yet crucial for investors and stakeholders due to their volatile nature, influenced by macroeconomic, geopolitical, and market-specific factors. We utilize historical price data to create and assess various machine-learning models to improve predicting accuracy. It utilizes machine learning techniques, specifically the Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM), to accurately collect and analyze the patterns present in the data. The study entails thorough data preprocessing, which encompasses cleaning and normalization, and models undergo training and validation through cross-validation techniques. Their performance is assessed using metrics such as Entropy, Log-Likelihood, Normalized Entropy Criterion (NEC), Integrated Completed Likelihood (ICL), Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). Our research shows that machine learning models offer higher forecasting capabilities. In addition, the prices of precious metals saw a substantial rise during the COVID-19 pandemic due to increased demand for secure investments, industrial usage, favorable monetary policies, worries about inflation, and a devalued US dollar. The pandemic underscored the dual nature of precious metals as both valuable metals and commodities used in industries, leading to an increase in their price during this time. The paper provides advice for investors and policymakers on how to utilize machine learning-driven insights to make well-informed decisions in the precious metals market.

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)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology and InvestmentSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207