Outlook: GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Time series to forecast n: 28 Dec 2022 for (n+4 weeks)
Methodology : Modular Neural Network (Market Direction Analysis)

## Abstract

The stock market prediction patterns are seen as an important activity and it is more effective. Hence, stock prices will lead to lucrative profits from sound taking decisions. Because of the stagnant and noisy data, stock market-related forecasts are a major challenge for investors. Therefore, forecasting the stock market is a major challenge for investors to use their money to make more profit. Stock market predictions use mathematical strategies and learning tools.(Vadlamudi, S., 2017. Stock Market Prediction using Machine Learning: A Systematic Literature Review. American Journal of Trade and Policy, 4(3), pp.123-128.) We evaluate GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED prediction models with Modular Neural Network (Market Direction Analysis) and Polynomial Regression1,2,3,4 and conclude that the GL1 stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+4 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Buy

## Key Points

1. Can neural networks predict stock market?
2. What is prediction model?
3. Fundemental Analysis with Algorithmic Trading

## GL1 Target Price Prediction Modeling Methodology

We consider GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED Decision Process with Modular Neural Network (Market Direction Analysis) where A is the set of discrete actions of GL1 stock holders, F is the set of discrete states, P : S × F × S → R is the transition probability distribution, R : S × F → R is the reaction function, and γ ∈ [0, 1] is a move factor for expectation.1,2,3,4

F(Polynomial Regression)5,6,7= $\begin{array}{cccc}{p}_{a1}& {p}_{a2}& \dots & {p}_{1n}\\ & ⋮\\ {p}_{j1}& {p}_{j2}& \dots & {p}_{jn}\\ & ⋮\\ {p}_{k1}& {p}_{k2}& \dots & {p}_{kn}\\ & ⋮\\ {p}_{n1}& {p}_{n2}& \dots & {p}_{nn}\end{array}$ X R(Modular Neural Network (Market Direction Analysis)) X S(n):→ (n+4 weeks) $R=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right)$

n:Time series to forecast

p:Price signals of GL1 stock

j:Nash equilibria (Neural Network)

k:Dominated move

a:Best response for target price

For further technical information as per how our model work we invite you to visit the article below:

How do AC Investment Research machine learning (predictive) algorithms actually work?

## GL1 Stock Forecast (Buy or Sell) for (n+4 weeks)

Sample Set: Neural Network
Stock/Index: GL1 GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED
Time series to forecast n: 28 Dec 2022 for (n+4 weeks)

According to price forecasts for (n+4 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Buy

X axis: *Likelihood% (The higher the percentage value, the more likely the event will occur.)

Y axis: *Potential Impact% (The higher the percentage value, the more likely the price will deviate.)

Z axis (Grey to Black): *Technical Analysis%

## IFRS Reconciliation Adjustments for GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED

1. Conversely, if changes in the extent of offset indicate that the fluctuation is around a hedge ratio that is different from the hedge ratio that is currently used for that hedging relationship, or that there is a trend leading away from that hedge ratio, hedge ineffectiveness can be reduced by adjusting the hedge ratio, whereas retaining the hedge ratio would increasingly produce hedge ineffectiveness. Hence, in such circumstances, an entity must evaluate whether the hedging relationship reflects an imbalance between the weightings of the hedged item and the hedging instrument that would create hedge ineffectiveness (irrespective of whether recognised or not) that could result in an accounting outcome that would be inconsistent with the purpose of hedge accounting. If the hedge ratio is adjusted, it also affects the measurement and recognition of hedge ineffectiveness because, on rebalancing, the hedge ineffectiveness of the hedging relationship must be determined and recognised immediately before adjusting the hedging relationship in accordance with paragraph B6.5.8.
2. The significance of a change in the credit risk since initial recognition depends on the risk of a default occurring as at initial recognition. Thus, a given change, in absolute terms, in the risk of a default occurring will be more significant for a financial instrument with a lower initial risk of a default occurring compared to a financial instrument with a higher initial risk of a default occurring.
3. An entity's business model is determined at a level that reflects how groups of financial assets are managed together to achieve a particular business objective. The entity's business model does not depend on management's intentions for an individual instrument. Accordingly, this condition is not an instrument-by-instrument approach to classification and should be determined on a higher level of aggregation. However, a single entity may have more than one business model for managing its financial instruments. Consequently, classification need not be determined at the reporting entity level. For example, an entity may hold a portfolio of investments that it manages in order to collect contractual cash flows and another portfolio of investments that it manages in order to trade to realise fair value changes. Similarly, in some circumstances, it may be appropriate to separate a portfolio of financial assets into subportfolios in order to reflect the level at which an entity manages those financial assets. For example, that may be the case if an entity originates or purchases a portfolio of mortgage loans and manages some of the loans with an objective of collecting contractual cash flows and manages the other loans with an objective of selling them.
4. For example, Entity A, whose functional currency is its local currency, has a firm commitment to pay FC150,000 for advertising expenses in nine months' time and a firm commitment to sell finished goods for FC150,000 in 15 months' time. Entity A enters into a foreign currency derivative that settles in nine months' time under which it receives FC100 and pays CU70. Entity A has no other exposures to FC. Entity A does not manage foreign currency risk on a net basis. Hence, Entity A cannot apply hedge accounting for a hedging relationship between the foreign currency derivative and a net position of FC100 (consisting of FC150,000 of the firm purchase commitment—ie advertising services—and FC149,900 (of the FC150,000) of the firm sale commitment) for a nine-month period.

*International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adjustment process involves reviewing the company's financial statements and identifying any differences between the company's current accounting practices and the requirements of the IFRS. If there are any such differences, neural network makes adjustments to financial statements to bring them into compliance with the IFRS.

## Conclusions

GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating. We evaluate the prediction models Modular Neural Network (Market Direction Analysis) with Polynomial Regression1,2,3,4 and conclude that the GL1 stock is predictable in the short/long term. According to price forecasts for (n+4 weeks) period, the dominant strategy among neural network is: Buy

### GL1 GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED Financial Analysis*

Rating Short-Term Long-Term Senior
Outlook*Ba1Ba1
Income StatementBaa2Caa2
Balance SheetBaa2Ba3
Leverage RatiosCBa3
Cash FlowCaa2B1
Rates of Return and ProfitabilityBa3Caa2

*Financial analysis is the process of evaluating a company's financial performance and position by neural network. It involves reviewing the company's financial statements, including the balance sheet, income statement, and cash flow statement, as well as other financial reports and documents.
How does neural network examine financial reports and understand financial state of the company?

### Prediction Confidence Score

Trust metric by Neural Network: 72 out of 100 with 757 signals.

## References

1. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Wainwright M. 2015. Statistical Learning with Sparsity: The Lasso and Generalizations. New York: CRC Press
2. A. Shapiro, W. Tekaya, J. da Costa, and M. Soares. Risk neutral and risk averse stochastic dual dynamic programming method. European journal of operational research, 224(2):375–391, 2013
3. Challen, D. W. A. J. Hagger (1983), Macroeconomic Systems: Construction, Validation and Applications. New York: St. Martin's Press.
4. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J. 2009. The Elements of Statistical Learning. Berlin: Springer
5. N. B ̈auerle and A. Mundt. Dynamic mean-risk optimization in a binomial model. Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, 70(2):219–239, 2009.
6. Chen, C. L. Liu (1993), "Joint estimation of model parameters and outlier effects in time series," Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 284–297.
7. Athey S, Imbens G. 2016. Recursive partitioning for heterogeneous causal effects. PNAS 113:7353–60
Frequently Asked QuestionsQ: What is the prediction methodology for GL1 stock?
A: GL1 stock prediction methodology: We evaluate the prediction models Modular Neural Network (Market Direction Analysis) and Polynomial Regression
Q: Is GL1 stock a buy or sell?
A: The dominant strategy among neural network is to Buy GL1 Stock.
Q: Is GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED stock a good investment?
A: The consensus rating for GLOBAL LITHIUM RESOURCES LIMITED is Buy and assigned short-term Ba1 & long-term Ba1 estimated rating.
Q: What is the consensus rating of GL1 stock?
A: The consensus rating for GL1 is Buy.
Q: What is the prediction period for GL1 stock?
A: The prediction period for GL1 is (n+4 weeks)