MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414530080 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18100542

AI as a Decision Companion: Supporting Executive Pricing and FX Decisions in Global Enterprises Through LSTM Forecasting

2025· article· en· W4414530080 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wesley Leeroy, Gordon C. Leeroy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchool of Engineering and Applied Science, University of PennsylvaniaUniversity of Texas at AustinUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsCounterfactual thinkingDemand forecastingForcing (mathematics)Depreciation (economics)Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortizationCorporationOffset (computer science)Analytics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global enterprises face increasingly volatile market conditions, with foreign exchange (FX) movements often forcing executives to make rapid pricing and strategy decisions under uncertainty. While artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed operational decision-making, its role in supporting board-level strategic choices remains underexplored. This paper examines how AI and advanced analytics can serve as a ‘decision companion’ for management teams and executives confronted with global shocks. Using Roblox Corporation as a case study, we apply a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) neural network to forecast bookings and simulate counterfactual scenarios involving euro depreciation and European price adjustments. The analysis reveals that a ten percent depreciation of the euro reduces consolidated bookings and profits by approximately six percent, and that raising European prices does not offset these losses due to demand elasticity. Regional attribution shows that the majority of the decline is concentrated in Europe, with only minor spillovers elsewhere. The findings demonstrate that AI enhances strategic agility by clarifying risks, quantifying trade-offs, and isolating regional effects, while ensuring that ultimate decisions remain with human executives.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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 risk and financial managementSame topicForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207