MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412898172 · doi:10.3390/proceedings2025125001

Abstract from the 1st International Online Conference on Risk and Financial Management

2025· article· en· W4412898172 on OpenAlexaff
Thanasis Stengos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk managementBusinessFinancial managementComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education loans complement human capital development and with successful recovery, they become self-sustainable.This recovery can be enhanced if defaults can be predicted accurately, which would also optimize the capital reserve requirements.Hence, this study aims to evaluate the attitudinal factors in educational loan repayment by integrating willingness with the ability of the borrower.This study follows a multi-method approach to testing the antecedent attitudinal variables of education loan repayment intention.A search of the literature finds themes for framing the hypothesis, which is tested quantitatively using partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM), and the prediction accuracy is calculated using artificial neural network (ANN) and deep neural network (DNN) modeling in multiple stages.Credit reporting and perceived quality of life were the two most significant variables in the PLS-SEM model integrated with the ANN model in multiple stages that resulted in increased prediction accuracy at each stage.The prediction accuracy of the ANN model before the integration of SEM was 87%, and after the final-stage SEM-ANN integration, it increased to 90%, while it increased from 89% to 93% after single-stage deep learning (DL) integration.Therefore, multi-stage SEM-ANN-DL integration improves the prediction accuracy for defaults.Improvements in the prediction accuracy can help financial institutions to plan their loan recovery and calculate the optimum capital reserve requirements for provisioning for non-performing assets. A Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Algorithms in Technical Trading Strategies Yeswanth SBachelor of Information Technology, Velalar College of Engineering and Technology, Erode, Tamil Nadu 638009, IndiaThis study explores the integration of machine learning (ML) techniques into technical trading strategies, evaluating their performance against traditional methods across diverse financial markets.It employs key technical indicators like Moving Averages, the Relative Strength Index (RSI), and other analytical tools to boost prediction accuracy.Historical market data, sourced from the yfinance library, forms the basis for designing and testing these strategies, enabling a detailed assessment of the profitability and effectiveness of ML-enhanced approaches.The research aims to showcase machine learning's ability to

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1850.048

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies→French-language works237,207→