MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7120072532 · doi:10.3126/jonc.v1i1-2.89049

AI-Powered Stock Forecasting: A Graph-Based Approach for NEPSE

2025· article· W7120072532 on OpenAlexaff
Sujal Bajracharya, Nishan Raj Dahal, Yajjyu Tuladhar, Yagya Raj Pandeya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of NAST College · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicStock Market Forecasting Methods
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock marketGraphFinancial marketStock (firearms)Market dataRobustness (evolution)Financial networksCornerstone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stock market is a cornerstone of the financial ecosystem, yet forecasting price movements remains a formidable challenge due to the dynamic and interconnected nature of influencing factors. While conventional prediction models often fail to adequately represent these complex relationships, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have emerged as a promising alternative, offering superior accuracy by modeling financial data as interconnected graphs. In this study, we introduce a visibility-based graph transformation technique to convert stock market features into a structured network, capturing long-memory dependencies. We then apply Graph Convolutional Networks (GCN) and Graph Attention Networks (GAT) to analyze trends and predict market behavior. Our experiments reveal that GCN outperforms GAT in modeling financial graph structures, demonstrating its robustness in deciphering intricate market relationships. These results underscore the potential of GNN-driven approaches in stock market forecasting, providing actionable insights for investors and advancing predictive analytics in the Nepalese stock market (NEPSE).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NAST CollegeSame topicStock Market Forecasting MethodsFrench-language works237,207