Tracking the Unseen: AI-Driven Dashboards for Real-Time Detection of Calendar Anomalies in Cryptocurrency Markets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study introduces a novel AI-powered Business Intelligence Dashboard System (AIBIDS) designed to detect and visualize calendar-based anomalies in cryptocurrency returns. Focusing on Bitcoin as a case study, the system integrates unsupervised machine learning algorithms to identify periods of abnormal market behavior across multiple temporal resolutions. The proposed system leverages a star-schema OLAP data warehouse, enabling real-time anomaly detection, dynamic visualization, and drill-down exploration of market irregularities. Empirical results confirm the presence of pronounced calendar effects in Bitcoin returns, such as heightened anomalies during Q1 and Q4, and reveal model-specific sensitivities to local versus global volatility. Our novel platform offers a practical, scalable innovation for investors, analysts, and regulators seeking to monitor cryptocurrency markets more effectively, and contributes to the emerging FinTech literature on AI-driven anomaly detection and behavioral market dynamics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".