false

Enhancing Financial Sentiment Analysis via Retrieval Augmented Large Language Models

Enhancing Financial Sentiment Analysis via Retrieval Augmented Large Language Models ArXiv ID: 2310.04027 “View on arXiv” Authors: Unknown Abstract Financial sentiment analysis is critical for valuation and investment decision-making. Traditional NLP models, however, are limited by their parameter size and the scope of their training datasets, which hampers their generalization capabilities and effectiveness in this field. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) pre-trained on extensive corpora have demonstrated superior performance across various NLP tasks due to their commendable zero-shot abilities. Yet, directly applying LLMs to financial sentiment analysis presents challenges: The discrepancy between the pre-training objective of LLMs and predicting the sentiment label can compromise their predictive performance. Furthermore, the succinct nature of financial news, often devoid of sufficient context, can significantly diminish the reliability of LLMs’ sentiment analysis. To address these challenges, we introduce a retrieval-augmented LLMs framework for financial sentiment analysis. This framework includes an instruction-tuned LLMs module, which ensures LLMs behave as predictors of sentiment labels, and a retrieval-augmentation module which retrieves additional context from reliable external sources. Benchmarked against traditional models and LLMs like ChatGPT and LLaMA, our approach achieves 15% to 48% performance gain in accuracy and F1 score. ...

October 6, 2023 · 2 min · Research Team

Four Things No One Will Tell You About ESG Data

Four Things No One Will Tell You About ESG Data ArXiv ID: ssrn-3420297 “View on arXiv” Authors: Unknown Abstract As the ESG finance field and the use of ESG data in investment decision‐making continue to grow, we seek to shed light on several important aspects of ESG measu Keywords: ESG data, sustainable finance, investment decision-making, environmental metrics, social responsibility, ESG Assets Complexity vs Empirical Score Math Complexity: 1.5/10 Empirical Rigor: 4.0/10 Quadrant: Philosophers Why: The paper is primarily conceptual, discussing data inconsistencies and methodological challenges in ESG metrics without heavy mathematical derivations or statistical modeling, placing it in the low math category; empirical rigor is moderate as it includes a hand-collected sample analysis but lacks backtest-ready implementation or code. flowchart TD A["Research Question: What critical limitations and biases exist in ESG data used for investment decisions?"] --> B["Methodology: Qualitative Analysis & Literature Review"] B --> C["Data/Inputs: Major ESG Ratings & Databases"] C --> D["Process: Comparative Analysis & Bias Identification"] D --> E["Key Finding: ESG ratings diverge significantly across providers"] D --> F["Key Finding: ESG data is backward-looking, not predictive"] D --> G["Key Finding: ESG metrics lack standardization & comparability"] D --> H["Key Finding: Ratings contain inherent methodological biases"] E & F & G & H --> I["Outcome: ESG data is a flawed proxy for sustainability; requires critical due diligence"]

July 16, 2019 · 2 min · Research Team

Time Value of Money

Time Value of Money ArXiv ID: ssrn-882850 “View on arXiv” Authors: Unknown Abstract This is a course material from the book Investment Decision Making. For Firm and Project Valuation. The book is originally in Spanish and is untitled as Decisio Keywords: Project Valuation, Capital Budgeting, Firm Valuation, Investment Decision Making, Discounted Cash Flow, Corporate Finance Complexity vs Empirical Score Math Complexity: 3.0/10 Empirical Rigor: 1.0/10 Quadrant: Philosophers Why: The text is course material on a foundational financial concept, focusing on conceptual explanation rather than advanced mathematics or empirical backtesting. There is no code, data, or implementation details provided. flowchart TD A["Research Goal:<br>Time Value of Money Application"] --> B["Methodology:<br>Discounted Cash Flow Analysis"] B --> C{"Data Inputs:<br>CF, Rate, Time Period"} C --> D["Computational Process:<br>Net Present Value Calculation"] D --> E{"Decision Rule:<br>NPV >= 0?"} E -- Yes --> F["Outcome:<br>Project Accepted"] E -- No --> G["Outcome:<br>Project Rejected"] F --> H["Key Finding:<br>Value Creation through<br>Investment Selection"] G --> H

February 14, 2006 · 1 min · Research Team