LSTMs promise much to financial time-series analysis, temporal and cross-sectional inference, but we find  they do not deliver in a real-world financial management task. We examine an alternative called Continual Learning (CL), a memory-augmented approach, which can provide transparent explanations ; which memory did what and when. This work has implications for many financial applications including to credit, time-varying fairness in decision making and more. We make three important new observations. Firstly, as well as being more explainable, time-series CL approaches outperform LSTM and a simple sliding window learner ( feed-forward neural net (FFNN) ) . Secondly, we show that CL based on a sliding window learner (FFNN) is more effective than CL based on a sequential learner (LSTM). Thirdly, we examine how real-world, time-series noise impacts several similarity approaches used in CL memory addressing. We provide these insights using an approach called Continual Learning Augmentation (CLA) tested on a complex real world problem; emerging market equities investment decision making. CLA provides a test-bed as it can be based on different types of time-series learner , allowing testing of LSTM and sliding window (FFNN ) learners side by side. CLA is also used to test several distance approaches used in a memory recall-gate: euclidean distance (ED), dynamic time warping (DTW), auto-encoder (AE) and a novel hybrid approach, warp-AE. We find CLA out-performs simple LSTM and FFNN learners and CLA based on a sliding window (CLA-FFNN) out-performs a LSTM (CLA-LSTM) implementation. While for memory-addressing, ED under-performs DTW and AE but warp-AE shows the best overall performance in a real-world financial task.
LSTMs promise much to financial time-series analysis, temporal and cross-sectional inference, but we find that they do not deliver in a real-world financial management task. We examine an alternative called Continual Learning (CL), a memory-augmented approach, which can provide transparent explanations , i.e. which memory did what and when. This work has implications for many financial applications including credit, time-varying fairness in decision making and more. We make three important new observations. Firstly, as well as being more explainable, time-series CL approaches outperform LSTMs as well as a simple sliding window learner using feed-forward neural networks (FFNN) . Secondly, we show that CL based on a sliding window learner (FFNN) is more effective than CL based on a sequential learner (LSTM). Thirdly, we examine how real-world, time-series noise impacts several similarity approaches used in CL memory addressing. We provide these insights using an approach called Continual Learning Augmentation (CLA) tested on a complex real-world problem, emerging market equities investment decision making. CLA provides a test-bed as it can be based on different types of time-series learners , allowing testing of LSTM and FFNN learners side by side. CLA is also used to test several distance approaches used in a memory recall-gate: Euclidean distance (ED), dynamic time warping (DTW), auto-encoders (AE) and a novel hybrid approach, warp-AE. We find that ED under-performs DTW and AE but warp-AE shows the best overall performance in a real-world financial task.
A
that
R
;
, i.e.
D
to
R
LSTM and
LSTMs as well as
R
(
using
R
net
networks
D
)
R
real world problem;
real-world problem,
R
learner
learners
R
sliding window (FFNN )
FFNN
R
euclidean
Euclidean
R
auto-encoder
auto-encoders
R
CLA out-performs simple LSTM and FFNN learners and CLA based on a sliding window (CLA-FFNN) out-performs a LSTM (CLA-LSTM) implementation. While for memory-addressing,
that