CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 47Stock Market Forecasting MethodsExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Topic Modeling

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Learning to Generate Explainable Stock Predictions using Self-Reflective Large Language Models

Open access
Koa, Kelvin J. L., Ma, Yunshan, Ng, Ritchie, Chua, Tat-Seng·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2402.03659arXiv 2402.03659
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Explaining stock predictions is generally a difficult task for traditional non-generative deep learning models, where explanations are limited to visualizing the attention weights on important texts. Today, Large Language Models (LLMs) present a solution to this problem, given their known capabilities to generate human-readable explanations for their decision-making process. However, the task of stock prediction remains challenging for LLMs, as it requires the ability to weigh the varying impacts of chaotic social texts on stock prices. The problem gets progressively harder with the introduction of the explanation component, which requires LLMs to explain verbally why certain factors are more important than the others. On the other hand, to fine-tune LLMs for such a task, one would need expert-annotated samples of explanation for every stock movement in the training set, which is expensive and impractical to scale. To tackle these issues, we propose our Summarize-Explain-Predict (SEP) framework, which utilizes a self-reflective agent and Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) to let a LLM teach itself how to generate explainable stock predictions in a fully autonomous manner. The reflective agent learns how to explain past stock movements through self-reasoning, while the PPO trainer trains the model to generate the most likely explanations from input texts. The training samples for the PPO trainer are also the responses generated during the reflective process, which eliminates the need for human annotators. Using our SEP framework, we fine-tune a LLM that can outperform both traditional deep-learning and LLM methods in prediction accuracy and Matthews correlation coefficient for the stock classification task. To justify the generalization capability of our framework, we further test it on the portfolio construction task, and demonstrate its effectiveness through various portfolio metrics.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2402.03659

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In finance, memory can store financial knowledge, market information, and successful experiences.

    “Some previous works also apply LLM-based agents in the finance domain, whose memory can store financial knowledge [113], market information [154, 156], and successful experiences [157, 155].”

    From A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [157]

    The citation to this paper is attached to “successful experiences,” not to financial knowledge or market information. Section 3.3 (p. 4) says the agent adds lessons learned from failures to its long-term memory and obtains correct responses after successful reflections. It does not say that successful experiences themselves are stored in memory. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 77

  1. [1][1] Md Mahmudul Alam and Gazi Uddin. 2009. Relationship between interest rate and stock price: empirical evidence from developed and developing countries. International Journal of Business and Management (ISSN 1833-3850) 4, 3 (2009), 43-51. -
  2. [2][2] Dzmitry Bahdanau, Kyunghyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. 2014. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.0473 (2014). - · arXiv
  3. [3][3] Yejin Bang, Samuel Cahyawijaya, Nayeon Lee, Wenliang Dai, Dan Su, Bryan Wilie, Holy Lovenia, Ziwei Ji, Tiezheng Yu, Willy Chung, et al. 2023. A multitask, multilingual, multimodal evaluation of chatgpt on reasoning, hallucination, and interactivity. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04023 (2023). - · arXiv
  4. [4][4] OrBiran and Kathleen R McKeown. 2017. Human-Centric Justification of Machine Learning Predictions.. In IJCAI , Vol. 2017. 1461-1467. -
  5. [5][5] Ricardo JGB Campello, Davoud Moulavi, and Jörg Sander. 2013. Density-based clustering based on hierarchical density estimates. In Pacific-Asia conference on knowledge discovery and data mining . Springer, 160-172. -
  6. [6][6] Salvatore M Carta, Sergio Consoli, Luca Piras, Alessandro Sebastian Podda, and Diego Reforgiato Recupero. 2021. Explainable machine learning exploiting news and domain-specific lexicon for stock market forecasting. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 30193-30205. -
  7. [7][7] Stephen Casper, Jason Lin, Joe Kwon, Gatlen Culp, and Dylan Hadfield-Menell. 2023. Explore, Establish, Exploit: Red Teaming Language Models from Scratch. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.09442 (2023). - · arXiv
  8. [8][8] Daniel Cer, Yinfei Yang, Sheng-yi Kong, Nan Hua, Nicole Limtiaco, Rhomni St John, Noah Constant, Mario Guajardo-Cespedes, Steve Yuan, Chris Tar, et al. 2018. Universal sentence encoder. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.11175 (2018). - · arXiv
  9. [9][9] Canyu Chen and Kai Shu. 2023. Combating misinformation in the age of llms: Opportunities and challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.05656 (2023). - · arXiv
  10. [10][10] Zihan Chen, Lei Nico Zheng, Cheng Lu, Jialu Yuan, and Di Zhu. 2023. ChatGPT Informed Graph Neural Network for Stock Movement Prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03763 (2023). - · arXiv
  11. [12][12] Davide Chicco and Giuseppe Jurman. 2020. The advantages of the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) over F1 score and accuracy in binary classification evaluation. BMC genomics 21, 1 (2020), 1-13. -
  12. [13][13] Davide Chicco, Niklas Tötsch, and Giuseppe Jurman. 2021. The Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) is more reliable than balanced accuracy, bookmaker informedness, and markedness in two-class confusion matrix evaluation. BioData mining 14, 1 (2021), 1-22. -
  13. [14][14] Victor DeMiguel, Lorenzo Garlappi, and Raman Uppal. 2009. Optimal versus naive diversification: How inefficient is the 1/N portfolio strategy? The review of Financial studies 22, 5 (2009), 1915-1953. -
  14. [15][15] Shumin Deng, Ningyu Zhang, Wen Zhang, Jiaoyan Chen, Jeff Z Pan, and Huajun Chen. 2019. Knowledge-driven stock trend prediction and explanation via temporal convolutional network. In Companion Proceedings of The 2019 World Wide Web Conference . 678-685. -
  15. [16][16] Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2018. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805 (2018). - · arXiv
  16. [17][17] Xiao Ding, Yue Zhang, Ting Liu, and Junwen Duan. 2014. Using structured events to predict stock price movement: An empirical investigation. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP) . 1415-1425. -
  17. [18][18] Xiao Ding, Yue Zhang, Ting Liu, and Junwen Duan. 2015. Deep learning for event-driven stock prediction. In Twenty-fourth international joint conference on artificial intelligence . -
  18. [19][19] Yujuan Ding, Yunshan Ma, Lizi Liao, Wai Keung Wong, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2021. Leveraging multiple relations for fashion trend forecasting based on social media. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 24 (2021), 2287-2299. -
  19. [20][20] Eugene F Fama. 1970. Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The journal of Finance 25, 2 (1970), 383-417. -
  20. [21][21] Eugene F Fama and Kenneth R French. 2015. A five-factor asset pricing model. Journal of financial economics 116, 1 (2015), 1-22. -
  21. [22][22] Fuli Feng, Huimin Chen, Xiangnan He, Ji Ding, Maosong Sun, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2018. Enhancing stock movement prediction with adversarial training. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.09936 (2018). - · arXiv
  22. [23][23] Fuli Feng, Xiangnan He, Xiang Wang, Cheng Luo, Yiqun Liu, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2019. Temporal relational ranking for stock prediction. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 37, 2 (2019), 1-30. -
  23. [24][24] Fuli Feng, Moxin Li, Cheng Luo, Ritchie Ng, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2021. Hybrid learning to rank for financial event ranking. In Proceedings of the 44th International ACMSIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval . 233243. -
  24. [25][25] Isabel O Gallegos, Ryan A Rossi, Joe Barrow, Md Mehrab Tanjim, Sungchul Kim, Franck Dernoncourt, Tong Yu, Ruiyi Zhang, and Nesreen K Ahmed. 2023. Bias and fairness in large language models: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.00770 (2023). - · arXiv
  25. [26][26] Tianyu Gao, Xingcheng Yao, and Danqi Chen. 2021. Simcse: Simple contrastive learning of sentence embeddings. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.08821 (2021). - · arXiv
  26. [28][28] Stefano Giglio, Bryan Kelly, and Dacheng Xiu. 2022. Factor models, machine learning, and asset pricing. Annual Review of Financial Economics 14 (2022), 337-368. -
  27. [29][29] Maarten Grootendorst. 2022. BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based TF-IDF procedure. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.05794 (2022). - · arXiv
  28. [30][30] Biyang Guo, Xin Zhang, Ziyuan Wang, Minqi Jiang, Jinran Nie, Yuxuan Ding, Jianwei Yue, and Yupeng Wu. 2023. How close is chatgpt to human experts? comparison corpus, evaluation, and detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.07597 (2023). - · arXiv
  29. [31][31] Anne Lundgaard Hansen and Sophia Kazinnik. 2023. Can ChatGPT Decipher Fedspeak? Available at SSRN (2023). -
  30. [32][32] Edward J Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, Shean Wang, Lu Wang, and Weizhu Chen. 2021. Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.09685 (2021). - · arXiv
  31. [33][33] Ziniu Hu, Weiqing Liu, Jiang Bian, Xuanzhe Liu, and Tie-Yan Liu. 2018. Listening to chaotic whispers: A deep learning framework for news-oriented stock trend prediction. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM international conference on web search and data mining . 261-269. -
  32. [34][34] Sima Jannati, Alok Kumar, Alexandra Niessen-Ruenzi, and Justin Wolfers. 2023. In-group bias in financial markets. Available at SSRN 2884218 (2023). -
  33. [35][35] Natasha Jaques, Asma Ghandeharioun, Judy Hanwen Shen, Craig Ferguson, Agata Lapedriza, Noah Jones, Shixiang Gu, and Rosalind Picard. 2019. Way off-policy batch deep reinforcement learning of implicit human preferences in dialog. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.00456 (2019). - · arXiv
  34. [36][36] Diederik P Kingma and Max Welling. 2013. Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6114 (2013). - · arXiv
  35. [37][37] Kelvin J.L. Koa, Yunshan Ma, Ritchie Ng, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2023. Diffusion Variational Autoencoder for Tackling Stochasticity in Multi-Step Regression Stock Price Prediction. In Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management . -
  36. [38][38] Harrison Lee, Samrat Phatale, Hassan Mansoor, Kellie Lu, Thomas Mesnard, Colton Bishop, Victor Carbune, and Abhinav Rastogi. 2023. RLAIF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.00267 (2023). - · arXiv
  37. [39][39] Haochen Li, Maria Polukarov, and Carmine Ventre. 2023. Detecting financial market manipulation with statistical physics tools. In Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on AI in Finance . 1-1. -
  38. [40][40] Shuqi Li, Weiheng Liao, Yuhan Chen, and Rui Yan. 2023. PEN: predictionexplanation network to forecast stock price movement with better explainability. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , Vol. 37. 5187-5194. -
  39. [41][41] Wei Li, Ruihan Bao, Keiko Harimoto, Deli Chen, Jingjing Xu, and Qi Su. 2021. Modeling the stock relation with graph network for overnight stock movement prediction. In Proceedings of the twenty-ninth international conference on international joint conferences on artificial intelligence . 4541-4547. -
  40. [42][42] Percy Liang, Rishi Bommasani, Tony Lee, Dimitris Tsipras, Dilara Soylu, Michihiro Yasunaga, Yian Zhang, Deepak Narayanan, Yuhuai Wu, Ananya Kumar, et al. 2022. Holistic evaluation of language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.09110 (2022). - · arXiv
  41. [43][43] Hao Liu, Carmelo Sferrazza, and Pieter Abbeel. 2023. Chain of hindsight aligns language models with feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.02676 3 (2023). - · arXiv
  42. [44][44] Yinhan Liu, Myle Ott, Naman Goyal, Jingfei Du, Mandar Joshi, Danqi Chen, Omer Levy, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Veselin Stoyanov. 2019. Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.11692 (2019). - · arXiv
  43. [45][45] Andrew W Lo. 2002. The statistics of Sharpe ratios. Financial analysts journal 58, 4 (2002), 36-52. -
  44. [46][46] Alejandro Lopez-Lira and Yuehua Tang. 2023. Can chatgpt forecast stock price movements? return predictability and large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.07619 (2023). - · arXiv
  45. [47][47] Yunshan Ma, Chenchen Ye, Zijian Wu, Xiang Wang, Yixin Cao, Liang Pang, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2023. Structured, Complex and Time-complete Temporal Event Forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.01052 (2023). - · arXiv
  46. [48][48] Aman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan, Luyu Gao, Sarah Wiegreffe, Uri Alon, Nouha Dziri, Shrimai Prabhumoye, Yiming Yang, et al. 2023. Self-refine: Iterative refinement with self-feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17651 (2023). - · arXiv
  47. [49][49] Leland McInnes, John Healy, and James Melville. 2018. Umap: Uniform manifold approximation and projection for dimension reduction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.03426 (2018). - · arXiv
  48. [50][50] Alexandra Niessen-Ruenzi and Stefan Ruenzi. 2019. Sex matters: Gender bias in the mutual fund industry. Management Science 65, 7 (2019), 3001-3025. -
  49. [51][51] Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, et al. 2022. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 27730-27744. -
  50. [52][52] Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher D Manning. 2014. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP) . 1532-1543. -
  51. [53][53] Xiao Pu, Mingqi Gao, and Xiaojun Wan. 2023. Summarization is (Almost) Dead. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.09558 (2023). - · arXiv
  52. [54][54] Yao Qin, Dongjin Song, Haifeng Chen, Wei Cheng, Guofei Jiang, and Garrison Cottrell. 2017. A dual-stage attention-based recurrent neural network for time series prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.02971 (2017). - · arXiv
  53. [55][55] Anand Rajaraman and Jeffrey David Ullman. 2011. Mining of massive datasets . Cambridge University Press. -
  54. [56][56] Ramit Sawhney, Shivam Agarwal, Arnav Wadhwa, and Rajiv Shah. 2020. Deep attentive learning for stock movement prediction from social media text and 27. company correlations. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) . 8415-8426. -
  55. [57][57] John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Radford, and Oleg Klimov. 2017. Proximal policy optimization algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347 (2017). - · arXiv
  56. [58][58] Robert P Schumaker and Hsinchun Chen. 2009. Textual analysis of stock market prediction using breaking financial news: The AZFin text system. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 27, 2 (2009), 1-19. -
  57. [59][59] Noah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Beck Labash, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan, and Shunyu Yao. 2023. Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning. arXiv:2303.11366 [cs.AI] - · arXiv
  58. [61][61] Nisan Stiennon, Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Daniel Ziegler, Ryan Lowe, Chelsea Voss, Alec Radford, Dario Amodei, and Paul F Christiano. 2020. Learning to summarize with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33 (2020), 3008-3021. -
  59. [62][62] Alexander Wei, Nika Haghtalab, and Jacob Steinhardt. 2023. Jailbroken: How does llm safety training fail? arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.02483 (2023). - · arXiv
  60. [63][63] Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc V Le, Denny Zhou, et al. 2022. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 24824-24837. -
  61. [64][64] Shengqiong Wu, Hao Fei, Leigang Qu, Wei Ji, and Tat-Seng Chua. 2023. NExTGPT: Any-to-Any Multimodal LLM. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05519 (2023). - · arXiv
  62. [65][65] Shijie Wu, Ozan Irsoy, Steven Lu, Vadim Dabravolski, Mark Dredze, Sebastian Gehrmann, Prabhanjan Kambadur, David Rosenberg, and Gideon Mann. 2023. Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17564 (2023). - · arXiv
  63. [66][66] Qianqian Xie, Weiguang Han, Xiao Zhang, Yanzhao Lai, Min Peng, Alejandro Lopez-Lira, and Jimin Huang. 2023. PIXIU: A Large Language Model, Instruction Data and Evaluation Benchmark for Finance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.05443 (2023). - · arXiv
  64. [67][67] Yumo Xu and Shay B Cohen. 2018. Stock movement prediction from tweets and historical prices. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) . 1970-1979. -
  65. [68][68] Hongyang Yang, Xiao-Yang Liu, and Christina Dan Wang. 2023. FinGPT: OpenSource Financial Large Language Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.06031 (2023). - · arXiv
  66. [69][69] Jingfeng Yang, Hongye Jin, Ruixiang Tang, Xiaotian Han, Qizhang Feng, Haoming Jiang, Bing Yin, and Xia Hu. 2023. Harnessing the power of llms in practice: A survey on chatgpt and beyond. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.13712 (2023). - · arXiv
  67. [70][70] Linyi Yang, Jiazheng Li, Ruihai Dong, Yue Zhang, and Barry Smyth. 2022. NumHTML: Numeric-Oriented Hierarchical Transformer Model for Multi-task Financial Forecasting. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , Vol. 36. 11604-11612. -
  68. [71][71] Linyi Yang, Tin Lok James Ng, Barry Smyth, and Riuhai Dong. 2020. Html: Hierarchical transformer-based multi-task learning for volatility prediction. In Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020 . 441-451. -
  69. [72][72] Zichao Yang, Diyi Yang, Chris Dyer, Xiaodong He, Alex Smola, and Eduard Hovy. 2016. Hierarchical attention networks for document classification. In Proceedings of the 2016 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies . 1480-1489. -
  70. [73][73] Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. 2022. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.03629 (2022). - · arXiv
  71. [74][74] Weiran Yao, Shelby Heinecke, Juan Carlos Niebles, Zhiwei Liu, Yihao Feng, Le Xue, Rithesh Murthy, Zeyuan Chen, Jianguo Zhang, Devansh Arpit, et al. 2023. Retroformer: Retrospective large language agents with policy gradient optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.02151 (2023). - · arXiv
  72. [75][75] Seonghyeon Ye, Hyeonbin Hwang, Sohee Yang, Hyeongu Yun, Yireun Kim, and Minjoon Seo. 2023. In-context instruction learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.14691 (2023). - · arXiv
  73. [76][76] Xinli Yu, Zheng Chen, Yuan Ling, Shujing Dong, Zongyi Liu, and Yanbin Lu. 2023. Temporal Data Meets LLM-Explainable Financial Time Series Forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.11025 (2023). - · arXiv
  74. [77][77] Wenxuan Zhang, Yue Deng, Bing Liu, Sinno Jialin Pan, and Lidong Bing. 2023. Sentiment Analysis in the Era of Large Language Models: A Reality Check. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.15005 (2023). - · arXiv
  75. [78][78] Xuan Zhang and Wei Gao. 2023. Towards llm-based fact verification on news claims with a hierarchical step-by-step prompting method. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.00305 (2023). - · arXiv
  76. [79][79] Wayne Xin Zhao, Kun Zhou, Junyi Li, Tianyi Tang, Xiaolei Wang, Yupeng Hou, Yingqian Min, Beichen Zhang, Junjie Zhang, Zican Dong, et al. 2023. A survey of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.18223 (2023). - · arXiv
  77. [80][80] Zihao Zhao, Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Dan Klein, and Sameer Singh. 2021. Calibrate before use: Improving few-shot performance of language models. In International Conference on Machine Learning . PMLR, 12697-12706.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Koa, K. J. L., Ma, Y., Ng, R., & Chua, T.-S.
Affiliations
National University of Singapore (SG)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
Pages
4304-4315
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2402.03659
arXiv
2402.03659
OpenAlex
W4396757543
Cited by
47
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 9
FWCI
32.14
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge (InK) (Singapore Management University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • National Research Foundation
  • National University of Singapore
  • National Research Foundation Singapore
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Stock Market Forecasting Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
stock price prediction, explainable AI, large language models, social media text, stock prices, financial forecasting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review