MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408567079 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc124-30

A hybrid GARCH, convolutional neural network and long short term memory methods for volatility prediction in stock market

2025· article· en· W4408567079 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elias Dessie, Tesfahun Birhane, Abdu Mohammed, Assaye Walelign

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatility (finance)Autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityStock marketEconometricsStock market volatilityConvolutional neural networkArtificial neural networkComputer scienceLong memoryFinancial economicsEconomicsArtificial intelligenceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forecasting the volatility of the stock market price is indispensable for managing the risks associated with market dynamics and provides valuable insights for financial decision in trading strategies. This study aims to enhance the accuracy of volatility prediction for stock market price using hybrid models combining econometric and deep learning approaches. Specifically, it introduces a novel GARCH-CNN-LSTM hybrid model for more precise volatility forecasting of stock market price. The GARCH model is efficient at capturing volatility clusters and kurtosis features, while the CNN excels in extracting spatial patterns from time series data, and LSTM effectively preserves essential information over extended periods. GARCH(1,1) model is selected based on AIC, maximum log-likelihood, and parameter significance. Subsequently, CNN and LSTM models are chosen for their complementary capabilities in volatility prediction. We evaluated the forecasting performance of the hybrid models from out-sample test data, employing Mean Square Error, Root Mean Square Error and Mean Absolute Error. The result indicates that the new model outperforms the existing models with an improvement of 8% to 13% accuracy. Furthermore, we conduct the Diebold-Mariano test to confirm significant differences in performance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.334 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207