Loading [MathJax]/extensions/TeX/boldsymbol.js
Research article Special Issues

Predicting stock market direction in South African banking sector using ensemble machine learning techniques

  • The ability to accurately predict stock price direction is important for investors and policymakers. We aim to predict the direction of daily stock returns for five major South African banks using ensemble machine learning techniques. Financial ratios were used as predictors in single classifier and ensemble models. The key findings were that the support vector machine performed best among single classifiers, with the highest accuracy for 4 banks ranging from 54% to 99% and produces fewer wrong classifications compared to its peer single classifiers. More importantly, the heterogeneous ensemble classifier, combining support vector machines, decision trees and k- (KNN) nearest neighbors, achieved average accuracy rates above 95% and outperformed all other models. This confirms that ensemble methods that combine multiple models can generate more accurate predictions compared to single classifiers. The results suggest that the heterogeneous ensemble is a suitable approach for predicting stock price direction in the South African banking sector. The findings imply that investing in banks may be a good decision and can assist investors. However, further research could expand the models to incorporate macroeconomic and other external factors that influence stock prices. Overall, we demonstrate the value of ensemble learning for a complex forecasting problem. The heterogeneous ensemble approach achieved high accuracy and outperformed single classifiers. However, future research incorporating additional factors and policy implications could build on these findings.

    Citation: Angelica Mcwera, Jules Clement Mba. Predicting stock market direction in South African banking sector using ensemble machine learning techniques[J]. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2023, 3(4): 401-426. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2023023

    Related Papers:

    [1] Esau Moyoweshumba, Modisane Seitshiro . Leveraging Markowitz, random forest, and XGBoost for optimal diversification of South African stock portfolios. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2025, 5(2): 205-233. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2025010
    [2] Fatima Tfaily, Mohamad M. Fouad . Multi-level stacking of LSTM recurrent models for predicting stock-market indices. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2022, 2(2): 147-162. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2022007
    [3] Sangjae Lee, Joon Yeon Choeh . Exploring the influence of online word-of-mouth on hotel booking prices: insights from regression and ensemble-based machine learning methods. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2024, 4(1): 65-82. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2024003
    [4] Moses Khumalo, Hopolang Mashele, Modisane Seitshiro . Quantification of the stock market value at risk by using FIAPARCH, HYGARCH and FIGARCH models. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2023, 3(4): 380-400. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2023022
    [5] Aditya Narvekar, Debashis Guha . Bankruptcy prediction using machine learning and an application to the case of the COVID-19 recession. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2021, 1(2): 180-195. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2021010
    [6] Ying Li, Keyue Yan . Prediction of bank credit customers churn based on machine learning and interpretability analysis. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2025, 5(1): 19-34. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2025002
    [7] Ming Li, Ying Li . Research on crude oil price forecasting based on computational intelligence. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2023, 3(3): 251-266. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2023015
    [8] Haihua Liu, Shan Huang, Peng Wang, Zejun Li . A review of data mining methods in financial markets. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2021, 1(4): 362-392. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2021020
    [9] Maria Paola Priola, Annalisa Molino, Giacomo Tizzanini, Lea Zicchino . The informative value of central banks talks: a topic model application to sentiment analysis. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2022, 2(3): 181-204. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2022009
    [10] Cui Yin Huang, Hong Liang Dai . Learning from class-imbalanced data: review of data driven methods and algorithm driven methods. Data Science in Finance and Economics, 2021, 1(1): 21-36. doi: 10.3934/DSFE.2021002
  • The ability to accurately predict stock price direction is important for investors and policymakers. We aim to predict the direction of daily stock returns for five major South African banks using ensemble machine learning techniques. Financial ratios were used as predictors in single classifier and ensemble models. The key findings were that the support vector machine performed best among single classifiers, with the highest accuracy for 4 banks ranging from 54% to 99% and produces fewer wrong classifications compared to its peer single classifiers. More importantly, the heterogeneous ensemble classifier, combining support vector machines, decision trees and k- (KNN) nearest neighbors, achieved average accuracy rates above 95% and outperformed all other models. This confirms that ensemble methods that combine multiple models can generate more accurate predictions compared to single classifiers. The results suggest that the heterogeneous ensemble is a suitable approach for predicting stock price direction in the South African banking sector. The findings imply that investing in banks may be a good decision and can assist investors. However, further research could expand the models to incorporate macroeconomic and other external factors that influence stock prices. Overall, we demonstrate the value of ensemble learning for a complex forecasting problem. The heterogeneous ensemble approach achieved high accuracy and outperformed single classifiers. However, future research incorporating additional factors and policy implications could build on these findings.



    Nowadays traffic models have become an indispensable tool in the urban and extraurban management of vehicular traffic. Understanding and developing an optimal transport network, with efficient movement of traffic and minimal traffic congestions, will have a great socio-economical impact on the society, in particular in pandemics situations.

    Besides guaranteeing optimal transport in the presence of pandemic situations, there is a second major aspect, where our work on traffic flow modelling may contribute. It is clear that in a pandemic situation the spreading of possible infections correlates with the number of contacts as e.g., modelled in SIR dynamics [1,2]. Traffic flow provides valuable information on possible contacts and on possible points of high population density in urban and extraurban areas. The prediction of the flow into and from those areas can help to calibrate the transmission coefficients in typical SIR models for disease propagation. Here, however, deterministic predictions are of little to no use in an a priori assessment of possible critical points of high traffic density. Therefore, it is mandatory to expand the current theory on macroscopic deterministic traffic flow models towards realistic but uncertain models. The current paper precisely tackles this point.

    A vast amount of literature about vehicular traffic modeling has flourished in the last decades. Nevertheless, there are still several limitations for obtaining trustful traffic forecasts. This is possibly due to the fact that the evolution of traffic is described by highly nonlinear dynamics that is also exposed to the presence of various sources and types of uncertainties [3,4,5,6]. For example, the uncertainty may stem from real data affected by errors in the measurements or the reaction time of drivers. A pandemic scenario adds additional uncertainties, but needs reliable estimates. In particular, in view of the discussion of possible measures to reduce traffic and accumulation in certain areas, the reliable and quantifiable prediction is of high importance. The approach presented in this paper allows to quantify the complete statistics of the uncertain solution and hence it also allows to compute e.g., rare events. Quantifying the propagation of uncertainty in nonlinear models is therefore of interest and the purpose of this paper.

    Uncertainty quantification in the sense used here is concerned with the propagation of input uncertainty through traffic models. Several approaches are presented in the literature and can be classified in non-intrusive and intrusive methods. The main idea underlying the former approach is to solve the model for fixed number of samples using deterministic numerical algorithms. Then, the statistics of the quantities of interest are determined by numerical quadrature. Typical examples are Monte-Carlo and stochastic collocation methods [7].

    In contrast, we consider the intrusive stochastic Galerkin method. Here, stochastic processes are represented as piecewise orthogonal functions, for instance Legendre polynomials or multiwavelets. These representations are known as generalized polynomial chaos (gPC) expansions [8,9,10,11,12]. Expansions of the stochastic input are substituted into the governing equations and a Galerkin projection is used to obtain deterministic evolution equations for the coefficients of the series expansions.

    Results for nonlinear hyperbolic systems are only partial, since desired properties like hyperbolicity are not necessarily transferred to the intrusive formulation [13,14]. A problem is posed by the fact that the deterministic Jacobian of the projected system differs from the random Jacobian of the original system. We refer the interested reader to [15] for examples of the Euler as well as shallow water equations. Furthermore, it is remarked in [16,Sec. 5] that simulations for Euler equations may break down for high Mach numbers unless auxiliary variables and wavelet-based expansions are used.

    Still, stochastic Galerkin methods applied to hyperbolic equations is an active field of research. Those can be successfully applied to scalar conservation laws, since the resulting Jacobian is symmetric. In the scalar case, well-balanced schemes have been developed [17] and a maximum-principle can be ensured [18].

    Furthermore, entropy-entropy flux pairs and hence hyperbolicity can be transferred to a stochastic Galerkin formulation by introducing auxiliary variables [13], which require expensive variable transforms. Although there are many attempts to make the transform more efficient and stable [19,20], the computational cost remain a drawback of this approach. To this end, an expansion in Roe variables has been proposed [16]. Since it exploits quadratic relationships, the necessary transforms are numerically cheap and stable. These auxiliary variables enable also a hyperbolic stochastic Galerkin formulation for isothermal Euler equations for arbitrary gPC expansions. Moreover, it has been observed that the shallow water equations allow for a hyperbolic stochastic Galerkin formulation which neither requires auxiliary variables nor any transform [21].

    Additional results are available for certain wavelet-based gPC expansions, including the Wiener-Haar basis and piecewise linear multiwavelets [16,22]. These wavelet expansions are motivated by a robust expansion for solutions that depend on the stochastic input in a non-smooth way and are used for stochastic multiresolution as well as adaptivity in the stochastic space [23,24,25].

    In this paper, we consider hyperbolic systems used in vehicular traffic modeling, namely second order macroscopic models [26,27]. The main feature is that they take into account the non-equilibria states, assuming that accelerations are not instantaneous. They are able to recover typical traffic phenomena as generating capacity drop, hysteresis, relaxation, platoon diffusion, or spontaneous congestions like stop-and-go waves [28,29,30].

    The first results in this direction were proposed by Payne and Whitham [31] taking into account that the speed of each car does not change instantaneously. However, their model has the drawback that the driver's decision is influenced by the road conditions behind. A second order model is due to Aw, Rascle [26] and Zhang [27]. By taking into account the differences between traffic and fluid flows, they designed models to simulate the anisotropic traffic behaviour.

    The inhomogeneous Aw-Rascle-Zhang (ARZ) model includes a relaxation term that allows drivers to achieve the equilibrium speed [32]. In the small relaxation limit the ARZ model approaches to the Lighthill-Whitham-Richards (LWR) model [33,34], which can be obtained by means of a Chapman-Enskog-type expansion. Here, the stability and well-posedness of solutions to the hyperbolic ARZ model is governed by the study of the sign of the diffusion coefficient, which requires the so-called sub-characteristic condition [35,36]. The diffusion term vanishes in the zero-relaxation limit and the LWR model is recovered [30,37,38].

    This paper analyzes stochastic Galerkin formulations for the Aw-Rascle-Zhang model in conservative and non-conservative form. The non-conservative form allows to state eigenvalues and hence ensures hyperbolicity. Furthermore, the stability of the system is investigated if it is relaxed to a first-order model. As basic tool we follow the approach in [30,37,38] and study definiteness properties of the corresponding diffusion coefficient by using a Chapman-Enskog-type expansion.

    Section 2 introduces the deterministic Aw-Rascle-Zhang model in conservative and non-conservative form. Section 3 presents stochastic Galerkin formulations. For a special class of wavelet-based gPC expansions an auxiliary variable that does not cause any computationally expensive transforms is introduced to ensure hyperbolicity. Section 4 is devoted to a stability analysis of the inhomogeneous ARZ model. The theoretical results are derived only for classical smooth solutions with deterministic relaxation. Riemann problems to weak solutions are illustrated numerically in Section 5.

    Typical macroscopic traffic flow models describe the density ρ=ρ(t,x) and the mean velocity v=v(t,x) of vehicles at a location xR and time t>0. The natural assumption that the total mass is conserved leads to impose that the density ρ satisfies the continuity equation

    tρ+x(ρv)=0with initial valuesρ(0,x)=ρ0(x). (2.1)

    In first-order models the velocity v=v(ρ) is given as a function of the density alone, e.g., the LWR model [33,34]. Second-order models describe the velocity by an additional differential equation. In particular, we consider the inhomogeneous Aw-Rascle-Zhang model [26,32] with relaxation

    {tρ+x(ρv)=0,t(v+h(ρ))+vx(v+h(ρ))=1τ(Veq(ρ)v). (2.2)

    Here, h(ρ):R+R+ is called hesitation or traffic pressure [39]. It is a smooth, strictly increasing function of the density. The relaxation term with parameter τ>0 on the right hand side makes the drivers tend to a given equilibrium velocity Veq(ρ). This is important, since the homogeneous ARZ model without relaxation has no mechanism to move drivers when initially are at rest. By introducing the variable z=ρ(v+h(ρ)), the system (2.2) can be written in conservative form as

    {tρ+x(zρh(ρ))=0,tz+x(z2ρzh(ρ))=ρτ(Veq(ρ)v(ρ,z))forv(ρ,z)=zρh(ρ). (2.3)

    Here, the velocity v(ρ,z) is a driver dependent property. The conservative formulation (2.3) is abbreviated as

    tu+xf(u)=1τS(u)with unknownsu=(ρz)andf(u)=(fρ(ρ,z)fz(ρ,z))=(zρh(ρ)z2ρzh(ρ)),S(u)=(0Sz(ρ,z))=(0ρ(Veq(ρ)v(ρ,z))).

    The eigenvalues of the Jacobian

    Duf(u)=(αfβ(u))α,β{ρ,z}=(h(ρ)ρh(ρ)1(zρ)2zh(ρ)2zρh(ρ)) (2.4)

    are λ1(ρ,z)=v(ρ,z)ρh(ρ) and λ2(ρ,z)=v(ρ,z). Hence, the ARZ model is strictly hyperbolic under the assumption ρ>0. The (local) equilibrium velocity Veq(ρ) satisfies the scalar conservation law

    tρ+xfeq(ρ)=0forfeq(ρ)=ρVeq(ρ)andfeq(ρ)=Veq(ρ)+ρVeq(ρ). (2.5)

    Stability requires that the full system propagates information faster than the local equilibrium, i.e. the sub-characteristic condition

    λ1(ρ,ρ(Veq(ρ)+h(ρ)))feq(ρ)λ2(ρ,ρ(Veq(ρ)+h(ρ)))withVeq(ρ)<0          (SC)

    is satisfied. It is shown in [35,Th. 3.1] for general 2× 2 systems that the sub-characteristic condition holds if and only if the first-order correction

    v=Veq(ρ)+τv(1)+O(τ2)

    leads to a dissipative advection-diffusion equation. For the deterministic ARZ model [27,38], this reads as

    tρ+xfeq(ρ)=τx(μ(ρ)xρ)with diffusion coefficientμ(ρ):=ρ2Veq(ρ)(Veq(ρ)+h(ρ)).          (DI)

    In the sequel, we will extend these results to the stochastic case.

    We extend the hyperbolic balance law (2.3) to account for uncertainties that arise from random initial conditions. The hesitation function and the equilibrium velocity, however, remain given deterministic functions. Uncertainties are summarized in a random variable ξ, defined on a probability space (Ω,F(Ω),P), and propagated by the random system

    tu(t,x,ξ)+xf(u(t,x,ξ))=1τS(u(t,x,ξ)). (3.1)

    For fixed time and space coordinates we expand the solution in terms of the generalized polynomial chaos (gPC) expansion

    GK[u](t,x,ξ):=Kk=0ˆuk(t,x)ϕk(ξ)with gPC modesˆu:=(ˆρˆz)R2(K+1).       (gPC)

    The piecewise polynomial functions ϕk(ξ) form an orthonormal basis with respect to the weighted inner product

    ϕi(),ϕj()=ϕi(ξ)ϕj(ξ)dP=δi,j.

    If the random solution u(t,x,ξ) is known, the gPC modes can be determined by the orthonormal projection u(t,x,),ϕk(). Under mild conditions on the probability measure the truncated expansion (gPC) converges in the sense GK[u](t,x,)u(t,x,)0 for K [8,40,41].

    A challenge occurs, since only the gPC modes ˆu(0,x) corresponding to the initial data are known. To determine them for t>0, we derive a differential equation, called stochastic Galerkin formulation, that describes their propagation in time and space.

    A naive approach would be to substitute the truncated expansion (gPC) into the random system (3.1) and then use a Galerkin ansatz to project it onto the space spanned by the basis functions. The resulting system, without relaxation term, reads as tˆu+xˆf(ˆu)=0 for 0R2(K+1)

    with flux functionˆf(ˆu(t,x))=f(Kk=0ˆuk(t,x)ϕk()),ϕi()i=0,,K (3.2)
    and JacobianDˆuˆf(ˆu(t,x))=(ˆfρ,ρ(ˆu(t,x))ˆfρ,z(ˆu(t,x))ˆfz,ρ(ˆu(t,x))ˆfz,z(ˆu(t,x))) (3.3)
    consisting of block matrices    ˆfα,β(ˆu(t,x))=αfβ(Kk=0uk(t,x)ϕk()),ϕi()ϕj()i,j=0,,K.

    Here, the Jacobian Dˆuˆf(ˆu) consists of the projected entries of the deterministic Jacobian (2.4). The Jacobian (3.3), however, has not necessarily real eigenvalues and a full set of eigenvectors. In the case of the Aw-Rascle-Zhang model, the flux function (3.2) and its Jacobian (3.3) are not even directly specifiable, since the deterministic expressions (2.3) and (2.4) envolve the terms z2ρ, zρ and the possibly nonpolynomial hesitation function h(ρ). Computing numerically the integrals in Eq (3.2) and (3.3) would lead to an expensive, non-hyperbolic, semi-intrusive scheme.

    Instead, we follow the approaches [14,21] to handle the terms z2ρ and zρ. We introduce the Riemann invariant w:=zρ in the original ARZ model [26]. While the semi-intrusive approach in Section 3.1 computes the gPC modes ˆw by the orthonormal projection w,ϕk, we project the product ρw and determine the modes by the pseudo-spectral Galerkin product GK[ρ]GK[w],ϕk=ˆzk. Similarly to [7,42,43], we express it by

    ˆρˆw:=P(ˆρ)ˆw=ˆzRK+1forP(ˆρ):=Kk=0ˆρkMkandMk:=ϕk,ϕiϕji,j=0,,K. (3.4)

    The matrix P(ˆρ) is strictly positive definite and hence invertible provided that the gPC expansion GK[ˆρ]>0 is strictly positive [44,45,46]. The strict positive definiteness of the matrix P(ˆρ) is assumed throughout this paper. This assumption excludes vacuum states. We have for the inverse terms the pseudo-spectral gPC approximations ˆw=P1(ˆρ)ˆz and ˆzˆw, i.e.,

    z2(ξ)ρ(ξ)Kk=0(ˆzˆw)kϕk(ξ)0andz(ξ)ρ(ξ)Kk=0ˆwkϕk(ξ)0forK.

    This yields for general gPC bases a stochastic Galerkin formulation for the homogeneous ARZ model, without relaxation, as

    {tˆρ+x(ˆzˆρˆh(ˆρ))=0,tˆz+x(ˆz(P1(ˆρ)ˆz)ˆzˆh(ˆρ))=0, (3.5)

    where ˆh(ˆρ)RK+1 denotes a given gPC formulation of a hesitation function. For example, the linear hesitation function h(ρ)=ρ has the gPC modes ˆh(ˆρ)=ˆρ. By using the following calculation rules, see e.g., [14,16,47],

    ˆρˆz=ˆzˆρ,Dˆρ[ˆρˆz]=P(ˆz),Dˆρ[P1(ˆρ)ˆz]=P1(ˆρ) P(P1(ˆρ)ˆz) (3.6)

    we obtain the Jacobian of the gPC formulation (3.5) as

    Dˆuˆf(ˆu)=(P(ˆh(ˆρ))P(ˆρ)ˆh(ˆρ)1P(ˆz)P1(ˆρ)P(P1(ˆρ)ˆz)P(ˆz)ˆh(ˆρ)P(ˆz)P1(ˆρ)+P(P1(ˆρ)ˆz)P(ˆh(ˆρ))),

    where 1:=diag{1,,1} denotes the identity matrix. The matrices Mk and hence the linear operator P:RK+1R(K+1)×(K+1), defined in Eq (3.4), are exactly computable in an offline stage. Therefore, the stochastic Galerkin formulation (3.5) is intrusive and no numerical quadrature is needed during a simulation. Furthermore, the eigenvalues can be exactly computed. However, eigenvalues are not proven real which motivates the following subsection.

    Under additional assumptions on the bases functions, hyperbolicity can be guaranteed. We consider basis functions ϕk that satisfy the following properties:

    (A1) The precomputed matrices M and Mk commute for all ,k=0,,K.

    (A2) There is an eigenvalue decomposition P(ˆα)=VD(ˆα)VT with constant eigenvectors.

    (A3) The matrices P(ˆα) and P(ˆβ) commute for all ˆα,ˆβRK+1.

    These properties have been proven equivalent in [47,Lem. 4.1]. Property (A1) allows for a numerical verification in a precomputation step such that basis functions satisfy also the other properties, which may be difficult to prove analytically. Property (A2) has been shown directly for the Wiener-Haar basis in [16,Appendix B], which we will consider in Section 5. This property allows for an efficient numerical implementation, since the eigenvalues D(ˆα)=VTP(ˆα)V are directly computable by a numerically cheap and stable matrix multiplication. Property (A3) has a technical benefit, needed for the following theoretical results. Following [47,48], polynomial functions h(ρ)=ργ, γN and their Jacobians are expressed as

    ˆh(ˆρ):=Pγ1(ˆρ)ˆρ=VD(ˆρ)γ1VTˆρ,^h(ˆρ)=Dˆρˆh(ˆρ)=γPγ1(ˆρ)=γVD(ˆρ)γ1VT. (3.7)

    Furthermore, the equality P(P1(ˆρ)ˆz)=P1(ˆρ)P(ˆz) is satisfied provided that properties (A1) – (A3) hold. Equation (3.7) and [46,Remark 1], where the representation of nonpolynomial functions is discussed, motivate to assume possibly nonpolynomial hesitation functions for γ1 and a Jacobian of the form ^h(ˆρ)=VDh(ˆρ)VT with strictly positive eigenvalues Dh(ˆρ)>0. Under these assumptions, we have the stochastic Galerkin formulation tˆu+xˆf(ˆu)=0 for the homogeneous ARZ model

    with flux functionˆf(ˆu)=(ˆzP(ˆρ)ˆh(ˆρ)P(ˆz)P1(ˆρ)ˆzP(ˆz)ˆh(ˆρ))and JacobianDˆuˆf(ˆu)=(P(ˆh(ˆρ))P(ˆρ)^h(ˆρ)1P2(ˆz)P2(ˆρ)P(ˆz)^h(ˆρ)2P(ˆz)P1(ˆρ)P(ˆh(ˆρ))). (3.8)

    The hyperbolic formulation, presented in Subsection 3.3, is directly extendable to a stochastic Galerkin formulation for the inhomogeneous ARZ model. To this end, we assume an arbitrary, but consistent gPC expansion ^Veq(ˆρ) of the random equilibrium speed Veq(ρ(ξ)), satisfying

    Veq(ρ(ξ))Kk=0^Veq(ˆρ)kϕk(ξ)0forK.

    Then, we introduce a stochastic Galerkin formulation of the relaxation term in the conservative formulation (2.3) by

    ˆSˆz(ˆu):=ˆρ(^Veq(ˆρ)ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz))with auxiliary variableˆv(ˆρ,ˆz)=P1(ˆρ)ˆzˆh(ˆρ). (3.9)

    This auxiliary variable also allows to obtain a stochastic Galerkin formulation for the non-conservative formulation (2.2). Altogether we have the hyperbolic stochastic Galerkin formulations for the inhomogeneous ARZ model in a

    conservative form{tˆρ+x(ˆzP(ˆρ)ˆh(ˆρ))=0,tˆz+x(P(ˆz)P1(ˆρ)ˆzP(ˆz)ˆh(ˆρ))=ˆρτ(^Veq(ˆρ)ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz)),         (C)
    non-conservative form   {           tˆρ+x(P(ˆρ)ˆv)=0,t(ˆv+ˆh(ˆρ))+P(ˆv)x(ˆv+ˆh(ˆρ))=1τ(^Veq(ˆρ)ˆv).        (N)

    We show in Theorem 3.1 that these two formulations are equivalent for smooth solutions, as it holds in the deterministic case [26]. However, if there is a jump in the solution, the non-conservative form contains the product of the discontinuous matrix-valued function P(ˆv) with the distributional derivative of the term ˆv+ˆh(ˆρ), which may contain a Dirac mass at the point of the jump. In general, such a product is not well-defined [49,Sec. 1]. Theorem 3.1 ensures that the system is strongly hyperbolic, which means that eigenvalues of the Jacobian Dˆuˆf(ˆu), i.e., the characteristic speeds of the hyperbolic system are real. Moreover, the Jacobian Dˆuˆf(ˆu) admits a complete set of eigenvectors which implies that classical solutions are well-posed [50].

    Theorem 3.1. Let a gPC expansion with the properties (A1) – (A3), a stochastic Galerkin formulation of a hesitation function ˆh(ˆρ) and a Galerkin formulation of an equilibrium velocity ^Veq(ˆρ) be given. Assume further a Jacobian of the hesitation function

    ^h(ˆρ):=Dˆρˆh(ˆρ)=VDh(ˆρ)VT

    with constant eigenvectors. Then, for smooth solutions the conservative (C) and non-conservative (N) stochastic Galerkin formulations to the inhomogeneous ARZ model are equivalent. The characteristic speeds are

    ^λ1(ˆρ,ˆz)=D(ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz))Dh(ˆρ)D(ˆρ)and^λ2(ˆρ,ˆz)=D(ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz))forˆv(ˆρ,ˆz)=P1(ˆρ)ˆzˆh(ˆρ),

    where D(ˆv) denote the eigenvalues of the matrix P(ˆv). Furthermore, the stochastic Galerkin formulations (N) and (C) are strongly hyperbolic in the sense that the characteristic speeds are real and the Jacobian Dˆuˆf(ˆu) admits a complete set of eigenvectors.

    Proof. Provided that properties (A1) – (A3) hold, we have P(P(ˆv)ˆρ)=P(ˆv)P(ˆρ) and the Galerkin product is symmetric (3.6). Hence, we obtain

    (ˆρˆv)(ˆv+ˆh(ˆρ))=P(P(ˆv)ˆρ)P1(ˆρ)ˆz=P(ˆv)ˆz=P(ˆz)ˆv=P(ˆz)P1(ˆρ)ˆzP(ˆz)ˆh(ˆρ).

    Since the opertor P(ˆρ) is linear, the homogeneous part of the non-conservative formulation can be rewritten as

    0=(ˆv+ˆh(ˆρ))[tˆρ+x(ˆρˆv)]+ˆρ[t(ˆv+ˆh(ˆρ))+ˆvx(ˆv+ˆh(ˆρ))]=tˆz+x((ˆρˆv)(ˆv+ˆh(ˆρ)))=tˆz+x(P(ˆz)P1(ˆz)ˆzˆzˆh(ˆρ)).

    Here, we have used the equality ˆρ(ˆvx)=(ˆρˆv)x, which is satisfied provided that the assumptions (A1) – (A3) hold, but not for general gPC bases, since the Galerkin product is typically not associative [42,43]. Likewise, the relaxation term in the conservative formulation is obtained by multiplying P(ˆρ), i.e., by applying the Galerkin product to the relaxation term of the non-conservative form. Therefore, the two formulations (C) and (N) are equivalent. To state the eigenvalues, we rewrite the first equation of the non-conservative form as

    0=^h(ˆρ)[tˆρ+x(ˆρˆv)]=tˆh(ˆρ)+ˆvˆh(ˆρ)x+^h(ˆρ)(ˆρˆvx), (3.10)

    where we have used the symmetry of the Galerkin product. By subtracting Eq (3.10) from the second equation in the non-conservative form and by using property (A2), i.e., an eigenvalue decomposition with constant, orthonormal eigenvectors VT=V1, we obtain

    t(ˆρˆv)+(P(ˆv)P(ˆρ)OP(ˆv)^h(ˆρ)P(ˆρ))x(ˆρˆv)=0t(VTˆρVTˆv)+(D(ˆv)D(ˆρ)OD(ˆv)Dh(ˆρ)D(ˆρ))x(VTˆρVTˆv)=0 (3.11)

    for 0R2(K+1) and OR(K+1)×(K+1). Due to the sparsity structure in the quasilinear form (3.11) a complete set of eigenvectors exists and eigenvalues ^λ1, ^λ2 are obtained.

    The parameter τ>0 determines the relaxation of the velocity ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz), given by Eq (3.9) as auxiliary variable, towards the gPC modes ^Veq(ˆρ) of the equilibrium velocity, which is a function of the density alone. We study in this section small, but positive values of the relaxation paramter τ>0, when the ARZ model is close to the

    equilibrium modeltˆρ+x^feq(ˆρ)=0,^feq(ˆρ)=ˆρ^Veq(ˆρ) (4.1)
    with JacobianDˆρ(ˆρ^Veq(ˆρ))=P(^Veq(ˆρ))+P(ˆρ)Dˆρ^Veq(ˆρ). (4.2)

    We observe from the Jacobian (4.2) that an eigenvalue decomposition of the equilibrium velocity of the form

    ^Veq(ˆρ):=Dˆρ^Veq(ˆρ)=VDVeq(ˆρ)VTwith negative eigenvaluesDVeq(ˆρ)<0

    should be assumed such that all waves of the equilibrium model propagate at the characteristic speeds

    ^λeq(ˆρ):=D(^Veq(ˆρ))+D(ˆρ)DVeq(ˆρ)

    not exceeding the equilibrium velocity. This is identified by the eigenvalues of the matrix P(^Veq(ˆρ)). Analogously to the analysis in [30,35,37,38], we use a Chapman-Enskog-type expansion that allows to study the behaviour of first-order perturbations of the equilibrium velocity. This yields a diffusion correction as stated in the following theorem.

    Theorem 4.1. Let a gPC expansion with the properties (A1) – (A3), a stochastic Galerkin formulation of a hesitation function ˆh(ˆρ) and a Galerkin formulation of an equilibrium velocity ^Veq(ˆρ) be given. Assume further that the Jacobians can be written as

    ^Veq(ˆρ):=Dˆρ^Veq(ˆρ)=VDVeq(ˆρ)VTand^h(ˆρ):=Dˆρˆh(ˆρ)=VDh(ˆρ)VT

    with constant eigenvectors. The first-order correction to the local equilibrium approximation reads

    tˆρ+x^feq(ˆρ)=τx(ˆμ(ˆρ)xˆρ),ˆμ(ˆρ):=V[D(ˆρ)2DVeq(ˆρ)(DVeq(ˆρ)+Dh(ˆρ))]VT.         (^DI)

    Furthermore, it is dissipative if and only if the sub-characteristic condition

    ^λ1(ˆρ,ˆz)^λeq(ˆρ)^λ2(ˆρ,ˆz)holds onˆz=ˆρ(^Veq(ˆρ)+ˆh(ˆρ))withDVeq(ˆρ)<0.         (^SC)

    Proof. We apply a Chapman-Enskog expansion

    ˆv=^Veq(ˆρ)+τ^v(1)+O(τ2).

    The linearity P(ˆα+ˆβ)=P(ˆα)+P(ˆβ) implies

    ˆvxˆv=^Veq(ˆρ)x^Veq(ˆρ)+O(τ)=P(^Veq(ˆρ))^Veq(ˆρ)xˆρ+O(τ),x(ˆρˆv)=x(ˆρ^Veq(ˆρ))+O(τ)=[P(^Veq(ˆρ))+P(ˆρ)^Veq(ˆρ)]xˆρ+O(τ).

    Hence, in the non-conservative formulation we obtain

    ^v(1)=^Veq(ˆρ)ˆvτ+O(τ)=t(^Veq(ˆρ)+ˆh(ˆρ))+^Veq(ˆρ)x(^Veq(ˆρ)+ˆh(ˆρ))+O(τ).

    The symmetry of the Galerkin product and the equilibrium model (4.1) yield

    ^v(1)=(^Veq(ˆρ)+^h(ˆρ))(tˆρ+P(^Veq(ˆρ))xˆρ)+O(τ)=(^Veq(ˆρ)+^h(ˆρ))P(ˆρ)^Veq(ˆρ)+O(τ),

    which implies the claim

    tˆρ+x^feq(ˆρ)=τx(ˆμ(ˆρ)xˆρ)+O(τ2).

    Theorem 4.1 gives conditions to properly choose a hesitation function h(ρ) and an equilibrium velocity Veq(ρ). In the deterministic case, various choices have been investiated to model also phantom traffic jams and stop-and-go waves by introducing a negative diffusion coefficient [28,29,30]. Here, we investigate states close to the equilibrium and choose a hesitation function h(ρ) and an equilibrium velocity Veq(ρ) such that sub-characteristic condition is fulfilled. The following corollary extends a widely used class, which includes the Greenshields flux, see e.g., [32,51,52] for the deterministic case, to the derived stochastic Galerkin formulation.

    Corollary 4.2. Let an equilibrium velocity and a hesitation function of the form

    Veq(ρ)=vmaxρmax(ρmaxργ)andh(ρ)=Veq(0)Veq(ρ)=vmaxρmaxργ

    with strictly positive constants vmax,ρmax,γ be given. Under the assumptions of Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 4.1 the sub-characteristic condition (^SC) is satisfied for the stochastic Galerkin formulations

    ^Veq(ˆρ)=vmaxρmax(ρmaxe1P(ˆρ)γ1ˆρ)andˆh(ˆρ)=^Veq(0)^Veq(ˆρ)=vmaxρmaxP(ˆρ)γ1ˆρ

    with unit vector e1=(1,0,,0)T.

    Proof. Equation (3.7) yields the stochastic Galerkin formulations and

    ^Veq(ˆρ)=γvmaxρmaxP(ˆρ)γ1=^h(ˆρ)O=^Veq(ˆρ)+^h(ˆρ)0=DVeq(ˆρ)+Dh(ˆρ).

    The matrices P(ˆρ) and P(ˆρ)γ1=VD(ˆρ)γ1VT are strictly positive definite. Hence, the Jacobian ^Veq(ˆρ) is strictly negative definite and we have DVeq(ˆρ)<0.

    The introduction of the gPC modes ˆv as auxiliary variable also allows for an efficient numerical evaluation of the flux function (3.8), the relaxation term (3.9) and the computation of eigenvalues by the numerically cheap and stable matrix vector multiplications

    D(ˆρ)=VTP(ˆρ)V,D(ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz))=VTP(ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz))V,Dh(ˆρ)=VT^h(ˆρ)V,^λ2(ˆρ,ˆz)=D(ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz)),^λ1(ˆρ,ˆz)=^λ2(ˆρ,ˆz)Dh(ˆρ)D(ˆρ),ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz)=VD1(ˆρ)VTˆzˆh(ˆρ),ˆf(ˆu)=(P(ˆρ)ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz)P(ˆz)ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz)),ˆSˆz(ˆu)=P(ˆρ)(^Veq(ˆρ)ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz)).

    Hence, the computational complexity grows like K2, which is relatively low compared to approaches with entropy and Roe variables [13,16,46]. The price is the restriction to gPC bases that satisfy the assumptions (A1) – (A3). Here, we use the Haar sequence [7,53,54] with level JN0 that generates a gPC basis SK with K+1=2J+1 elements by

     SK:={1,ψ(ξ),ψj,k(ξ) | k=0,,2j1, j=1,,J} forψj,k(ξ):=2j2ψ(2jξk) and ψ(ξ):={1if  0ξ<12,1if  12ξ<1,0else.

    Using a lexicographical order we identify the gPC basis ϕ0=1, ϕ1=ψ, ϕ2=ψ1,0, ϕ3=ψ1,1, etc.

    An equidistant space discretization Δx>0 is used to divide the space interval [0,xend] into N cells such that ΔxN=xend with centers xj:=(j+12)Δx and edges xj12:=jΔx. The discrete time steps are denoted by tk:=kΔt for kN0. Due to the eigenvalue estimates |^λ1(ˆρ,ˆz)||^λ2(ˆρ,ˆz)|=|D(ˆv(ˆρ,ˆz))| a local Lax-Friedrichs flux [55] is efficiently evaluated as

    \begin{equation*} {\boldsymbol{\widehat{F}}}({\boldsymbol{\bar{u}_\ell}}, {\boldsymbol{\bar{u}_r}}) : = \frac{1}{2} \Big[ {\mathbf{\hat{f}}}({\boldsymbol{\bar{u}_\ell}}) + {\mathbf{\hat{f}}}({\boldsymbol{\bar{u}_r}}) \Big] + \frac{1}{2} \max\limits_{j = \boldsymbol{\ell}, \boldsymbol{r}} \bigg\{ \Big| \mathcal{D}\big(\hat{v}( {\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}}_j )\big) \Big| \bigg\} ({\boldsymbol{\bar{u}_\ell}} - {\boldsymbol{\bar{u}_r}}). \end{equation*}

    For numerical purposes the relaxation term is expressed as

    {\widehat{\mathbf{S}}}_{\hat{z}} ({\mathbf{\hat{u}}}) : = \hat{\rho}\ast \Big( \widehat{{V_{ \text{eq}}}}(\hat{\rho}) - \hat{v}(\hat{\rho}, \hat{z}) \Big) = \widehat{M}(\hat{\rho})-\hat{z} \quad\text{for}\quad \widehat{M}(\hat{\rho}) : = \hat{\rho} \ast \Big( \widehat{{V_{ \text{eq}}}}(\hat{\rho}) +\hat{h}(\hat{\rho}) \Big).

    Since the term {\widehat{\mathbf{S}}}_{\hat{z}} ({\mathbf{\hat{u}}}) depends also in the stochastic Galerkin formulation on the unknown \hat{z}\in\mathbb{R}^{K+1} in a linear way, a first-order IMEX scheme [38,56,57], which treats the advection part explicitly and the possibly stiff relaxation implicitly, can be employed:

    \begin{align*} & {\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}}_j^{k+1} = {\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}}_j^{k} - \frac{\Delta t}{\Delta x} \Big( {\boldsymbol{\widehat{F}}} \big(\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}_j^{(1)}, \boldsymbol{\bar{u}}_{j+1}^{(1)} \big) - {\boldsymbol{\widehat{F}}} \big(\boldsymbol{\bar{u}}_{j-1}^{(1)}, \boldsymbol{\bar{u}}_j^{(1)}\big) \Big), \\ &\text{with}\quad \boldsymbol{\bar{u}}_j^k = \Big( \boldsymbol{\bar{\rho}}_j^k, \boldsymbol{\bar{z}}_j^k \Big)^{\text{T}}, \quad \boldsymbol{\bar{u}}_j^{(1)} = \Big( \boldsymbol{\bar{\rho}}_j^{(1)}, \boldsymbol{\bar{z}}_j^{(1)} \Big)^{\text{T}} \quad\text{and}\quad \begin{cases} \begin{aligned} \boldsymbol{\bar{\rho}}_j^{(1)} & = \boldsymbol{\bar{\rho}}_j^k, \\ \boldsymbol{\bar{z}}_j^{(1)} & = \frac{\tau}{\tau + \Delta t} \boldsymbol{\bar{z}}_j^k + \frac{\Delta t}{\tau + \Delta t} \widehat{M}\big(\boldsymbol{\bar{\rho}}_j^k\big) \end{aligned} \end{cases} \end{align*}

    In the sequel, we consider a linear hesitation function and a relaxation towards the LWR model, i.e

    \begin{cases} \begin{aligned} \partial_t \rho + \partial_x(\rho v)& = 0, \\ \partial_t \big(v+\rho\big) + v \partial_x\big(v+\rho\big) & = \frac{1}{\tau} \Big({V_{ \text{eq}}}(\rho)-v\Big) \end{aligned} \end{cases} \quad \text{with equilibrium velocity} \qquad {V_{ \text{eq}}}(\rho) = 1-\rho

    and normalized density in the equilibrium model. According to Corollary 4.2 the sub-characteristic condition is fulfilled and solutions to the ARZ model are expected to be close to the LWR model if the relaxation parameter \tau > 0 is sufficiently small. Moreover reference solutions are provided, where a Monte-Carlo method is applied to the analytical solution with M = 10^6 uniformly distributed samples \rho_\ell(\xi) \sim \mathcal{U} for either of the following Riemann problems:

    \begin{align} \rho(x, 0, \xi)& = \begin{cases} \rho_\ell(\xi) \sim\mathcal{U}(0.15, 0.45) &\text{for }\ \ x < 1, \\ 0.7 &\text{for }\ \ x > 1, \end{cases} &v(x, 0, \xi)& = \begin{cases} 0.7 &\text{for }\ \ x < 1, \\ 0.3 &\text{for }\ \ x > 1, \end{cases} \end{align}
    \begin{align} \rho(x, 0, \xi)& = \begin{cases} \rho_\ell(\xi) \sim \mathcal{U}(0.55, 0.85) &\text{for }\ \ x < 1, \\ 0.3 &\text{for }\ \ x > 1, \end{cases} &v(x, 0, \xi)& = \begin{cases} 0.3 &\text{for }\ \ x < 1, \\ 0.7 &\text{for }\ \ x > 1. \end{cases} \end{align}

    This section illustrates the hyperbolic character of the derived stochastic Galerkin formulation, in particular the statement of Theorem 3.1. Figure 1 and 2 illustrate the solution to the stochastic Galerkin formulation to the Haar basis with level J . The mean of the density is given by the mode \hat{\rho}_0(t, x) and plotted as blue line. The confidence region to the truncated gPC expansion is black shaded. Furthermore, the Monte-Carlo confidence region is shown as black dotted line and the reference mean as green dashed line. We observe from Figure 1 for the rarefaction wave that the confidence region is already well captured for level J = 0 and the mean for J = 3 .

    Figure 1.  Solution to the rarefaction wave at time t = 1 with discretization \Delta x = 0.001 , \text{CFL} = 0.45 and Monte-Carlo reference solution with M = 10^6 samples.
    Figure 2.  Solution to the shock wave at t = 1 with discretization \Delta x = 0.001 , \text{CFL} = 0.45 and Monte-Carlo reference solution with M = 10^6 samples.

    Likewise, Figure 2 shows the approximation for the shock case, when each realization admits a discontinuity. The mean, however, is smooth as an average of discontinuous functions. The stochastic Galerkin formulation approximates the mean as step functions (blue line). This behaviour is typical and has been observed also for continuous input distributions [13,46,47,58].

    This section is devoted to the stability analysis in Section 4. We investigate the guaranteed dissipativity condition of Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.2, which presume a relaxation to a first-order model. Figures 3 and 4 show the behaviour of the inhomogeneous ARZ model for various relaxation parameter, including the limit \tau = 0 . The left panels show the results for the level J = 2 without relaxation and the exact confidence regions are plotted in the remaining panels for comparison. Indeed, we observe a convergence towards the LWR model according to Corollary 4.2.

    Figure 3.  Solution to the inhomogeneous ARZ model for the rarefaction case.
    Figure 4.  Solution to the inhomogeneous ARZ model for the shock case.

    A stochastic Galerkin formulation of the Aw-Rascle-Zhang (ARZ) model has been presented. In particular, hyperbolicity has been shown for a special class of wavelet-based expansions. The analysis is based on a non-conservative formulation. This allows a stability analysis for the inhomogeneous ARZ with stiff relaxation, when solutions are expected to be close to an equilibrium velocity that satisfies a scalar conservation law. Due to the non-conservative formulation, the derived theoretical results hold only for smooth solutions. However, a relationship to a conservative form has been established. This allows for a numerical discretization with an IMEX scheme.

    This research is funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany's Excellence Strategy – EXC-2023 Internet of Production – 390621612 and by DFG HE5386/18, 19, DFG 320021702/GRK2326.

    Furthermore, we would like to offer special thanks to Giuseppe Visconti.

    The authors declare there is no conflicts of interest.



    [1] Ahamed J, Mir RN, Chishti MA (2022) Industry 4.0 oriented predictive analytics of cardiovascular diseases using machine learning, hyperparameter tuning and ensemble techniques. Ind Robo 49: 544–554. https://doi.org/10.1108/IR-10-2021-0240 doi: 10.1108/IR-10-2021-0240
    [2] Albanis G, Batchelor R (2007) Combining heterogeneous classifiers for stock selection. Intell Syst Account Financ Manag 15: 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/isaf.282 doi: 10.1002/isaf.282
    [3] Basistha A, Kurov A (2008) Macroeconomic cycles and the stock market's reaction to monetary policy. J Bank Financ 32: 2606–2616. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1092246 doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1092246
    [4] Bonga-Bonga L (2012) Equity prices, monetary policy, and economic activities in emerging market economies: The case of South Africa. J Appl Bus Res 28: 1217–1228. https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v28i6.7337 doi: 10.19030/jabr.v28i6.7337
    [5] Brown GW, Cliff MT (2004) Investor sentiment and the near-term stock market. J Empir Financ 11: 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jempfin.2002.12.001 doi: 10.1016/j.jempfin.2002.12.001
    [6] Chen K, Zhou Y, Dai F (2015) A LSTM-based method for stock returns prediction: A case study of China stock market. In 2015 IEEE international conference on big data (big data), 2823–2824. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2953542 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2953542
    [7] De Long JB, Shleifer A, Summers LH, et al. (1990) Noise trader risk in financial markets. J Polit Econ 98: 703–738. https://doi.org/10.1086/261703 doi: 10.1086/261703
    [8] Dimingo R (2019) Prediction of stock market returns and direction: application of machine learning models. University of Johannesburg, South Africa, 77. Available from: https://hdl.handle.net/10210/414991.
    [9] Fonseca AR, Leles MC, Moreira MG, et al. (2021) Testing the application of support vector machine (SVM) to technical trading rules. In 2021 IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/SysCon48628.2021.9447068 doi: 10.1109/SysCon48628.2021.9447068
    [10] Galdi P, Tagliaferri R (2018) Data mining: accuracy and error measures for classification and prediction. Encyclopedia of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, 1: 431–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809633-8.20474-3 doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-809633-8.20474-3
    [11] Geetha E, Swaaminathan TM (2015) A study on the factors influencing stock price A Comparative study of Automobile and Information Technology Industries stocks in India. Int J Curr Res Acad Rev 3: 97–109. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcrar.2015.303.011 doi: 10.20546/ijcrar.2015.303.011
    [12] Gonzalez RT, Padilha CA, Barone DAC (2015) Ensemble system based on genetic algorithm for stock market forecasting. In 2015 IEEE congress on evolutionary computation (CEC), 3102–3108. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2015.7257276 doi: 10.1109/CEC.2015.7257276
    [13] Goyal N, Kumar N, Kapil (2022) Leaf Bagging: A novel meta heuristic optimization based framework for leaf identification. Multimedia Tools Appl 81: 32243–32264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-022-12825-z doi: 10.1007/s11042-022-12825-z
    [14] Gupta P, Seth DD (2022) Improving the Prediction of Heart Disease Using Ensemble Learning and Feature Selection. Int J Adv Soft Comput Appl 14: 37–40. https://doi.org/10.15849/IJASCA.220720.03 doi: 10.15849/IJASCA.220720.03
    [15] Hassan MR, Nath B, Kirley M (2007) A fusion model of HMM, ANN and GA for stock market forecasting. Expert Syst Appl 33: 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.04.007 doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2006.04.007
    [16] Hu X, Madden LV, Edwards S, et al. (2015) Combining models is more likely to give better predictions than single models. Phytopathology 105: 1174–1182. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-11-14-0315-R doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-11-14-0315-R
    [17] Huang W, Nakamori Y, Wang Y (2005) Forecasting stock market movement direction with support vector machine. Comput Operat Res 32: 2513–2522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2004.03.016 doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2004.03.016
    [18] Ifeacho C, Ngalawa H (2014) Performance of the South African banking sector since 1994. J Appl Bus Res 30: 1183–1196. https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v30i4.8663 doi: 10.19030/jabr.v30i4.8663
    [19] Ioannidis C, Kontonikas A (2008) The impact of monetary policy on stock prices. J Policy Model 30: 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2007.06.015 doi: 10.1016/j.jpolmod.2007.06.015
    [20] Kabari LG, Onwuka UC (2019) Comparison of bagging and voting ensemble machine learning algorithm as a classifier. Int J Adv Res Comput Sci Soft Eng 9: 19–23.
    [21] Khan MMR, Arif RB, Siddique MAB, et al. (2018) Study and observation of the variation of accuracies of KNN, SVM, LMNN, ENN algorithms on eleven different datasets from UCI machine learning repository. In 2018 4th International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Information & Communication Technology (iCEEiCT), 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEEICT.2018.8628041 doi: 10.1109/CEEICT.2018.8628041
    [22] Kheradyar S, Ibrahim I (2011) Stock return predictability with financial ratios. Int J Trade Economics Financ 2: 391–396. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJTEF.2011.V2.137 doi: 10.7763/IJTEF.2011.V2.137
    [23] Khumalo S, Ferreira-Schenk S, Van Rensburg JJ, et al. (2021) Evaluating the Credit Risk and Macroeconomic Interaction in South African Banks. Acta Universitatis Danubius. Œconomica 17. 66–82. Available from: https://dj.univ-danubius.ro/index.php/AUDOE/article/view/964/1647.
    [24] Kim KJ (2003) Financial time series forecasting using support vector machines. Neurocomputing 55: 307–319. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIS.2014.22 doi: 10.1109/CIS.2014.22
    [25] Lawal AI, Somoye RO, Babajide AA, et al. (2018) The effect of fiscal and monetary policies interaction on stock market performance: Evidence from Nigeria. Future Bus J 4: 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbj.2017.11.004 doi: 10.1016/j.fbj.2017.11.004
    [26] Lee J, Kim R, Koh Y, et al. (2019) Global stock market prediction based on stock chart images using deep Q-network. IEEE Access 7: 167260–167277. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2953542 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2953542
    [27] Letsoalo MM (2021) The Profitability-Structure Phenomenon: Evidence from the South African Banking Industry. University of Johannesburg (South Africa). https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcrar.2015.303.011
    [28] Mamela TL, Sukdeo N, Mukwakungu SC (2020) The integration of AI on workforce performance for a South African Banking Institution. In 2020 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Big Data, Computing and Data Communication Systems (icABCD), 1–8. 10.1109/icABCD49160.2020.9183834
    [29] Maysami RC, Koh TS (2000) A vector error correction model of the Singapore stock market. Int Rev Econ Financ 9: 79–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1059-0560(99)00042-8 doi: 10.1016/S1059-0560(99)00042-8
    [30] Murphy JJ (1999) Technical analysis of the financial markets: A comprehensive guide to trading methods and applications. Penguin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3264-1
    [31] Patel J, Shah S, Thakkar P, et al. (2015) Predicting stock and stock price index movement using trend deterministic data preparation and machine learning techniques. Expert Syst Appl 42: 259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.07.040 doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2014.07.040
    [32] Prasad D, Goyal SK, Sharma A, et al. (2019) System model for prediction analytics using k-nearest neighbours algorithm. J Comput Theor Nanosci 16: 4425–4430. https://doi.org/10.1166/jctn.2019.8536 doi: 10.1166/jctn.2019.8536
    [33] Pring MJ (2021) Technical Analysis Explained: The Successful Investor's to Spotting investment trends turning points. McGraw-Hill. https://doi.org/10.1036/0071381937 doi: 10.1036/0071381937
    [34] Rigobon R, Sack B (2003) Measuring the reaction of monetary policy to the stock market. Q J Econ 118: 639–669. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303321675473 doi: 10.1162/003355303321675473
    [35] Salzberg S, Chandar R, Ford H, et al. (1995) Decision trees for automated identification of cosmic-ray hits in Hubble Space Telescope images. Publ Astron Soc Pac 107: 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1086/133551 doi: 10.1086/133551
    [36] Selvin S, Vinayakumar R, Gopalakrishnan EA, et al. (2017) Stock price prediction using LSTM, RNN and CNN-sliding window model. In 2017 international conference on advances in computing, communications and informatics (icacci), 1643–1647. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCI.2017.8126078 doi: 10.1109/ICACCI.2017.8126078
    [37] Sewell M (2011) History of the efficient market hypothesis. Rn 11: 14. Available from: http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/fileadmin/UCL-CS/images/Research_Student_Information/RN_11_04.pdf.
    [38] Silwal PP, Napit S (2019) Fundamentals of Stock Price in Nepalese commercial banks. Int Res J Manag Sci 4: 83–98. https://doi.org/10.3126/irjms.v4i0.27887 doi: 10.3126/irjms.v4i0.27887
    [39] Shakya D, Agarwal M, Deshpande V, et al. (2022) Estimating particle froude number of sewer pipes by boosting machine-learning models. J Pipeline Syst Eng 13: 04022012. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000643 doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000643
    [40] Shen P (2000) The P/E ratio and stock market performance. Economic review-Federal reserve bank of Kansas City 85: 23–36.
    [41] Silva J, Rojas K, Naveda AS, et al. (2020) Assembly of classifiers to determine the academic profile of students. Procedia Comput Sci 170: 953–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.03.102 doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2020.03.102
    [42] Singh T, Mehta S, Varsha MS (2010) Macroeconomic factors and stock returns: Evidence from Taiwan. J Econ Int Financ 2: 217–227. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228985237_Macroeconomic_factor_and_stock_returns_Evidence_from_Taiwan.
    [43] Sun J, Li H (2012) Financial distress prediction using support vector machines: Ensemble vs. individual. Appl Soft Comput 12: 2254–2265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2012.03.063 doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2012.03.063
    [44] Tchereni BH, Mpini S (2020) Monetary policy shocks and stock market volatility in emerging markets. Risk Gov Control Financ Mark I 10: 50–61. https://doi.org/10.22495/rgcv10i3p4 doi: 10.22495/rgcv10i3p4
    [45] Todorovski L, Džeroski S (2003) Combining classifiers with meta decision trees. Mach learn 50: 223–249. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021709817809 doi: 10.1023/A:1021709817809
    [46] Tsai CF, Lin YC, Yen DC, et al. (2011) Predicting stock returns by classifier ensembles. Appl Soft Comput 11: 2452–2459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2010.10.001 doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2010.10.001
    [47] Yun KK, Yoon SW, Won D (2021) Prediction of stock price direction using a hybrid GA-XGBoost algorithm with a three-stage feature engineering process. Expert Syst Appl 186: 115716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115716 doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115716
    [48] Zahedi J, Rounaghi MM (2015) Application of artificial neural network models and principal component analysis method in predicting stock prices on Tehran Stock Exchange. Physica A 438: 178–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2015.06.033 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2015.06.033
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. El Mehdi Ferrouhi, Ibrahim Bouabdallaoui, A comparative study of ensemble learning algorithms for high-frequency trading, 2024, 24, 24682276, e02161, 10.1016/j.sciaf.2024.e02161
    2. Nazif Ayyıldız, Bankacılık Sektörüne Derin Öğrenme Yöntemiyle Bakış: BİST Banka Endeksi Hareket Yönlerinin Tahmini, 2024, 13, 2147-1185, 1277, 10.15869/itobiad.1451709
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2266) PDF downloads(185) Cited by(2)

Figures and Tables

Figures(2)  /  Tables(4)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog