ArticlePloS one2020
Action-specialized expert ensemble trading system with extended discrete action space using deep reinforcement learning.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-based Assessment of Risk Factors for Coronary Heart Disease in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Construction of a Prediction Model for a Treatment Regimen.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Stock market tradingPeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- A Novel Evaluation Strategy to Artificial Neural Network Model Based on Bionics.Journal of bionic engineering · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite active research on trading systems based on reinforcement learning, the development and performance of research methods require improvements. This study proposes a new action-specialized expert ensemble method consisting of action-specialized expert models designed specifically for each reinforcement learning action: buy, hold, and sell. Models are constructed by examining and defining different reward values that correlate with each action under specific conditions, and investment behavior is reflected with each expert model. To verify the performance of this technique, profits of the proposed system are compared to those of single trading and common ensemble systems. To verify robustness and account for the extension of discrete action space, we compared and analyzed changes in profits of the three actions to our model's results. Furthermore, we checked for sensitivity with three different reward functions: profit, Sharpe ratio, and Sortino ratio. All experiments were conducted with S&P500, Hang Seng Index, and Eurostoxx50 data. The model was 39.1% and 21.6% more efficient than single and common ensemble models, respectively. Considering the extended discrete action space, the 3-action space was extended to 11- and 21-action spaces, and the cumulative returns increased by 427.2% and 856.7%, respectively. Results on reward functions indicated that our models are well trained; results of the Sharpe and Sortino ratios were better than the implementation of profit only, as in the single-model cases. The Sortino ratio was slightly better than the Sharpe ratio.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.