arxiv-2609-05235 SRC-0209 · paperPRICE: A Systematic Study of LLM Adaptation Choices for Bitcoin Price Forecasting
Maryam Fakhari, Mehran Safayani
Created: 2026-09-04 · Ingested: 2026-09-19
https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.05235(opens in a new tab)Cryptocurrency markets exhibit extreme volatility and non-stationary dynamics that challenge conventional forecasting methods. Although Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise for time series forecasting, the combined effects of adaptation choices remain largely unexplored in financial settings. This study introduces PRICE, a structured approach for adapting LLMs to short-term Bitcoin price forecasting. Built on a 4-bit quantized LLaMA-3 8B model, PRICE investigates how fine-tuning, numerical representation, prompting, inference, and decoding jointly influence forecasting performance.
In brief
How you format numbers, prompt, and decode matters more than expected when adapting an LLM to numeric forecasting, and those choices persist after fine-tuning. Integer-rounded prices beat raw, standard-normalized, and instance-normalized inputs, and a structured Context-Task-Format prompt still beats Chain-of-Thought, implicit CoT, and few-shot even on a fine-tuned model.
PRICE uses a 4-bit quantized LLaMA-3 8B-Instruct with LoRA, trained 1-step-ahead on hourly BTC/USDT closing prices from March 2023 to December 2024, 96-point input windows, 8-hour horizon, chronological 80%/10%/10% split, on 1 RTX 2080 with 11 GB.
Rounded inputs gave MAPE 3.01 vs 4.23 raw, 9.43 standard-normalized, 548.36 instance-normalized. Fine-tuning cut MAE from 2063.62 to 534.85 (single-step) and 1779.88 to 445.60 (recursive). Recursive inference also fixed output validity: zero-shot single-step produced only 1182 of 1441 valid predictions. CTF reached MAE 432.83 vs 445.60 basic and 436.68 iCoT; temperature 0.0 gave MAE 415.89 vs 432.48 at the default 0.95. On the test set PRICE reached MAE 0.03, MAPE 1.53 against 8 baselines including PatchTST, TimesNet, and Chronos at MAE 0.04.
Ablations vary 1 factor at a time under fixed conditions, so attribution is reasonably clean, but the effects are single-seed, 1 asset, 1 horizon, 1 model family, with CoT and few-shot only tested zero-shot and partly on other backbones. Treat representation and decoding choices as first-order knobs, not implementation detail.
Written from the abstract by claude-opus-5 on 2026-09-18, with every figure checked against it. Not a substitute for the paper.
Referenced by
Claims in this catalog that draw on this source, and whether as support or counterpoint.
- supportsWhen a text LLM is prompted to forecast numeric price series, feeding the history as integer-rounded values on the original price scale gives lower forecast error than full-decimal raw values, standard-normalized values, or per-window instance-normalized values, because rounding cuts token fragmentation while keeping magnitudes in the distribution the model saw in pretraining.
- supportsWhen a text-pretrained LLM is prompted to forecast a numeric price series, rounding the input values to integers while keeping the original price scale gives lower forecast error than full-precision raw values, training-set standardization, or per-window instance normalization, because normalized values fall outside the numeric distributions the model saw in pretraining and per-window rescaling makes the same price appear differently across samples.