Beyond Correlation: Refutation-Validated Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis for Explainable Energy Market Returns

Wihan van der Heever, Keane Ong, Ranjan Satapathy, Erik Cambria
3/23/2026
cs.AIcs.CLcs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 3 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

This paper proposes a refutation-validated framework for aspect-based sentiment analysis in financial markets, addressing the limitations of correlational studies that cannot distinguish genuine associations from spurious ones. Using X data for the energy sector, we test whether aspect-level sentiment signals show robust, refutation-validated relationships with equity returns. Our pipeline combines net-ratio scoring with z-normalization, OLS with Newey West HAC errors, and refutation tests including placebo, random common cause, subset stability, and bootstrap. Across six energy tickers, only a few associations survive all checks, while renewables show aspect and horizon specific responses. While not establishing causality, the framework provides statistically robust, directionally interpretable signals, with limited sample size (six stocks, one quarter) constraining generalizability and framing this work as a methodological proof of concept.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 3 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Cite this paper

@article{heever2026beyond,
  title  = {Beyond Correlation: Refutation-Validated Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis for Explainable Energy Market Returns},
  author = {Wihan van der Heever and Keane Ong and Ranjan Satapathy and Erik Cambria},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2603.21473},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.21473v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2603.21473.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2603.21473)

Discussion