Cited by 25Economics of Agriculture and Food MarketsStock Market Forecasting MethodsForecasting Techniques and Applications

Nowcasting commodity prices using social media

Open access
Kim, Jaewoo, Cha, Meeyoung, Lee, Jong Gun·2017·PeerJ Computer Science

Abstract

Gathering up-to-date information on food prices is critical in developing regions, as it allows policymakers and development practitioners to rely on accurate data on food security. This study explores the feasibility of utilizing social media as a new data source for predicting food security landscape in developing countries. Through a case study of Indonesia, we developed a nowcast model that monitors mentions of food prices on Twitter and forecasts daily price fluctuations of four major food commodities: beef, chicken, onion, and chilli. A longitudinal test over 15 months of data demonstrates that not only that the proposed model accurately predicts food prices, but it is also resilient to data scarcity. The high accuracy of the nowcast model is attributed to the observed trend that the volume of tweets mentioning food prices tends to increase on days when food prices change sharply. We discuss factors that affect the veracity of price quotations such as social network-wide sensitivity and user influence.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7717/peerj-cs.126

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • It is possible to distill relevant signals from mobile phones, credit card transactions, and social media data.

    “For real-time and near-term systems, it is possible to distill relevant signals from mobile phones, credit card transactions, and social media data [171,434,645].”

    From Tackling climate change with machine learning (2023) · cites this paper as [434]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kim, J., Cha, M., & Lee, J. G.
Affiliations
  • Graduate School of Culture Technology, Korea Advanced Institute of Science & Technology, Daejeon, South Korea
  • Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
  • United Nations (US)
Venue
PeerJ Computer Science
Publisher
PeerJ
Published
2017-07-31
Volume
3
Pages
e126
ISSN
2376-5992 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2741068695
Cited by
25
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2
FWCI
3.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PeerJ Computer Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Industrial Technology Innovation Program (10073144)
  • Developing machine intelligence based conversation system
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economics of Agriculture and Food Markets
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Stock Market Forecasting Methods
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Forecasting Techniques and Applications
Keywords
nowcasting, food prices, social media, Twitter, food security, commodity price forecasting, data scarcity, user influence, Indonesia

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