Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Research Articles

Vol. 11 No. sp4 (2024): Recent Advances in Agriculture by Young Minds - I

Heterogeneous autoregression inspired neural network framework for predicting groundnut price volatility in India

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.5849
Submitted
15 October 2024
Published
31-12-2024

Abstract

Groundnut, predominantly cultivated as a rainfed crop, is highly susceptible to significant price volatility. This study aimed to investigate and enhance the performance of traditional models for forecasting the realized volatility of groundnut price returns across five Indian states (Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Gujarat) by evaluating traditional models and neural network-based frameworks. Using groundnut price returns data spanning fourteen years and six months (01 January 2010 to 30 June 2024), weekly realized volatility was computed. The predictive behaviour of Heterogeneous Autoregression (HAR)-based neural network frameworks was evaluated. Neural networks were assessed using time series crossvalidation, and model metrics were employed to generate Model Confidence Sets (MCS). These sets were ranked based on model inclusion. The Extended Cochran–Armitage test was applied to identify and compare the best-performing models. Subsequently, model forecasts were tested and compared using the two-sided Diebold-Mariano test, and Model Confidence Sets were generated to evaluate predictive performance. For this unconventional weekly realized volatility forecast, the HAR (1,6,12) framework emerged as the most effective. Notably, the implementation of Convolutional Neural Network (CNNs) combined with RNNs, such as Conv1D -GRU and Conv1D-LSTM, demonstrated superior and consistent predictive performance across all states. Among standalone neural networks, GRU performed on par with CNN-based RNNs. These findings highlight the potential of CNN and GRU models as effective and accurate methods for forecasting agricultural price volatility.

References

  1. Bellemare MF. Rising food prices, food price volatility and social unrest. Amer J Agri Eco. 2015 Jan;97(1):1-21. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aau038
  2. Binswanger-Mkhize HP. Is there too much hype about indexbased agricultural insurance?. Journal of Development Studies. 2012 Feb 1;48(2):187-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2011.625411
  3. Myers RJ, Jayne TS. Multiple?regime spatial price transmission with an application to maize markets in southern Africa. Amer J Agri Eco. 2012 Jan;94(1):174-88. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aar123
  4. Minot N. Food price volatility in sub-Saharan Africa: Has it really increased?. Food Policy. 2014 Apr 1;45:45-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.12.008
  5. Lyócsa Š, Plíhal T, Výrost T. FX market volatility modelling: Can we use low-frequency data?. Finance Research Letters. 2021 May 1;40:101776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101776
  6. Liu Y. Novel volatility forecasting using deep learning–long short term memory recurrent neural networks. Expert Systems with Applications. 2019 Oct 15;132:99-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.04.038
  7. Bucci A. Realized volatility forecasting with neural networks. Journal of Financial Econometrics. 2020;18(3):502-31. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjfinec/nbaa008
  8. Christensen K, Siggaard M, Veliyev B. A machine learning approach to volatility forecasting. Journal of Financial Econometrics. 2023 Dec 15;21(5):1680-727. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjfinec/nbac020
  9. Bucci A. Cholesky–ANN models for predicting multivariate realized volatility. Journal of Forecasting. 2020 Sep;39(6):865-76. https://doi.org/10.1002/for.2664
  10. Sahiner M, McMillan DG, Kambouroudis D. Do artificial neural networks provide improved volatility forecasts: Evidence from Asian markets. Journal of Economics and Finance. 2023 Sep;47(3):723-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12197-023-09629-8
  11. Diane L, Brijlal P. Forecasting stock market realized volatility using random forest and artificial neural network in South Africa. Int J Eco and Fin Issues. 2024 Mar 18;14(2):5-14. https://doi.org/10.32479/ijefi.15431
  12. Bucci A. Forecasting realized volatility: A review. Journal of Advanced Studies in Finance (JASF). 2017;8(16):94-138. Available from: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/83232
  13. Hizmeri R, Izzeldin M, Nolte I, Pappas V. A generalized heterogeneous autoregressive model using market information. Quantitative Finance. 2022 Aug 3;22(8):1513-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2022.2076606
  14. Baek C, Park M. Sparse vector heterogeneous autoregressive modeling for realized volatility. J Korean Stat Soc. 2021 Jun;50(2):495-510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42952-020-00090-5
  15. Clements A, Preve DP. A practical guide to harnessing the har volatility model. Journal of Banking and Finance. 2021 Dec 1;133:106285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2021.106285
  16. Zhu Q, You M, Wu S. Forecasting volatility with time-varying coefficient regressions. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society. 2020;2020(1):3151473. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3151473
  17. Cybenko G. Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function. Math Control Signals Syst. 1989 Dec;2(4):303-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02551274

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.