4.7 Article

A hybrid model based on adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system to forecast Taiwan stock market

期刊

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
卷 38, 期 11, 页码 13625-13631

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.127

关键词

Subtractive clustering; ANFIS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, many academy researchers have proposed several forecasting models based on technical analysis to predict models such as Engle (1982) and Cheng, Chen, and Wei (2010). After reviewing the literature, two major drawbacks are found in past models: (1) the forecasting models based on artificial intelligence algorithms (Al), such as neural networks (NN) and genetic algorithms (GAs), produce complex and unintelligible rules; and (2) statistic forecasting models, such as time series, require some basic assumptions for variables and build forecasting models based on mathematic equations, which are not easily understandable by stock investors. In order to refine these drawbacks of past models, this paper has proposed a model, based on adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system which uses multi-technical indicators, to predict stock price trends. Three refined processes have proposed in the hybrid model for forecasting: (1) select essential technical indicators from popular indicators by a correlation matrix; (2) use the subtractive clustering method to partition technical indicator value into linguistic values based on an data discretization method; (3) employ a fuzzy inference system (FIS) to extract rules of linguistic terms from the dataset of the technical indicators, and optimize the FIS parameters based on an adaptive network to produce forecasts. A six-year period of the TAIEX is employed as experimental database to evaluate the proposed model with a performance indicator, root mean squared error (RMSE). The experimental results have shown that the proposed model is superior to two listing models (Chen's and Yu's models). (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据