From the simplest price formation models to paradigm of agent-based computational finance: a first step

  • Takashi Yamada
  • Takao Terano
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Series on Agent Based Social Systems book series (ABSS, volume 6)


This paper studies similarities and differences between models based on Monte-Carlo method by focusing on so-called “stylized facts.” In this study, we propose a model based on evolutionary algorithm and take the other model based on statistical physics. For this purpose, first we present a genetic learning model of investor sentiment and then several ordinary time series analyses are conducted after generating sample paths. Finally, the price properties are compared to those in the Ising spin model. Our results show that both the Monte-Carlo simulations seem to lead to similar dynamics reported in real markets in that the agents are boundedly rational or have some biases towards the market. However, other time series properties are apparently different since the algorithm of price formation is different.


Unit Root Stylize Fact Hurst Exponent Price Movement Foreign Exchange Market 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Arifovic J (2000) Evolutionary algorithms in macroeconomic models. Macroecon. Dyn. 4:373–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arifovic J, Gençay R (2000) Statistical properties of genetic learning in a model of exchange rate. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 24:981–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barberis N, Shleifer A, Vishny R (1998) A model of investor sentiment. J. Finan. Econ. 49:307–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barberis N, Huang M, Santos T (2001) Prospect theory and asset prices. Q. J. E. 116:1–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Behera L, Schweitzer F (2003) On spatial consensus formation: is the Sznajd model different from a voter model? Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 14:1331–1354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen S-H (2002) Evolutionary computation in economics and finance. Physica-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Duffy J (2006) Agent-based models and human subject experiments. in Tesfatsion, L., Judd, K.L. (eds.) Handbook of computational economics: agent-based computational economics volume 2, North-Holland, Netherlands, 949–1012Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Durlauf S N (2005) Complexity and empirical economics. Econ. J. 115:F225–F243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hirabayashi T, Takayasu H, Miura H, Hamada K (1993) The behavior of a threshold model of market price in stock exchange. Fractals 1:29–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hommes C H (2001) Financial markets as nonlinear adaptive evolutionary systems. Quant. Finan. 1:149–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hommes C H (2006) Heterogeneous agent models in economics and finance. in Tesfatsion, L., Judd, K.L. (eds.) Handbook of computational economics: agent-based computational economics volume 2, North-Holland, Netherlands, 1109–1186Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Izumi K, Ueda K (2001) Phase transition in a foreign exchange market: analysis based on an artificial market approach. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 5:456–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Izumi K, Nakamura S, Ueda K (2005) Development of an artificial market model based on a field study. Info. Sci. 170:35–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    LeBaron B, Arthur W B, Palmer R (1999) Time series properties of an artificial stock market. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 23:1487–1516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    LeBaron B (2000) Agent-based computational finance: suggested readings and early research. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 24:679–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    LeBaron B (2001) A builder’s guide to agent-based financial markets. Quant. Finan. 1:254–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    LeBaron B (2006) Agent-based computational finance. in Tesfatsion, L., Judd, K.L. (eds.) Handbook of computational economics: agent-based computational economics volume 2, North-Holland, Netherlands, 1187–1234Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Levy M, Levy H, Solomon S: Microscopic simulations of financial markets: from investor behaviour to market phenomena. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lux T (1998) The socio-economic dynamics of speculative markets: interacting agents, chaos, and fat tails of return distributions. J. Econ. Behav. Org. 33:143–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lux T, Marchesi M (1999) Scaling and criticality in a stochastic multi-agent model of a financial market. Nature 397:498–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lux T, Marchesi M (2000) Volatility clustering in financial markets: a microsimulation of interacting agents. Int. J. Th. Appl. Finan. 3:675–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 23.
    Riechmann T (2001) Genetic algorithm learning and evolutionary games. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 25:1019–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 24.
    Sznajd-Weron K, Weron R (2002) A simple model of price formation. Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 13:115–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 25.
    Tesfatsion L, Judd K L (eds.) (2006): Handbook of computational economics: agent-based computational economics volume 2. North-Holland, NetherlandGoogle Scholar
  25. 26.
    Ueda K, Uchida Y, Izumi K, Ito Y (2004) How do expert dealers make profits and reduce the risk of loss in a foreign exchange market? Proc. of the 26th annual conf. of the Cognitive Science Society, Chicago, USA, 1357–1362Google Scholar
  26. 27.
    Yamada T, Terano T (2006) Price formations in genetic learning model of investor sentiment. Proc. of 9th Joint Conf. on Info. Sci., 285–288Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takashi Yamada
    • 1
  • Takao Terano
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computational Intelligence and System ScienceTokyo Institute of TechnologyKanagawaJapan

Personalised recommendations