scholarly journals Hardness of Learning in Rich Environments and Some Consequences for Financial Markets

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 467-480
Author(s):  
Ayan Bhattacharya

This paper examines the computational feasibility of the standard model of learning in economic theory. It is shown that the information update technique at the heart of this model is impossible to compute in all but the simplest scenarios. Specifically, using tools from theoretical machine learning, the paper first demonstrates that there is no polynomial implementation of the model unless the independence structure of variables in the data is publicly known. Next, it is shown that there cannot exist a polynomial algorithm to infer the independence structure; consequently, the overall learning problem does not have a polynomial implementation. Using the learning model when it is computationally infeasible carries risks, and some of these are explored in the latter part of the paper in the context of financial markets. Especially in rich, high-frequency environments, it implies discarding a lot of useful information, and this can lead to paradoxical outcomes in interactive game-theoretic situations. This is illustrated in a trading example where market prices can never reflect an informed trader’s information, no matter how many rounds of trade. The paper provides new theoretical motivation for the use of bounded rationality models in the study of financial asset pricing—the bound on rationality arising from the computational hardness in learning.

Journalism ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Strauß

This study relies on 22 expert interviews and a survey among 40 financial journalists in the United States to reassess the role of financial journalists for financial markets in today’s high-frequency information and news era. Findings point to a discrepancy between the ideal active watchdog role journalists picture for themselves and their actual role enactment. Furthermore, the process of constructing and distributing financial news has been found to be self-referential within the financial system, leaving little room for alternative voices. In this sense, the influence of regular financial reporting in driving stock market prices has been found to be limited but contingent on various factors such as unexpected news, repeatedly negative reporting, or news about a merger. Eventually, facing the proliferation of online news, journalists have raised a general concern regarding the loss of journalistic values, but they also see potentials for their discipline in light of automated reporting and online news.


1999 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Bjornson ◽  
Hong Shik Kim ◽  
Kiseok Lee
Keyword(s):  

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Pardo Guerra

Although an old and rare practice, spoofing has re-emerged as a subject ofintense debate within modern financial markets. An activity entailing thefraudulent creation of orders to buy and sell securities with the purposeof manipulating the market, spoofing highlights the multiple and complexmoral valences of contemporary, automated, finance. In this paper, I studyspoofing as an opportunity to understand markets and their relations ofexchange. In particular, by extending Weberian metaphors of markets asmoral and organizational communities, I examine how the courts and marketparticipants distinguish the ‘false’ transactions of spoofing from the‘real’ exchanges of 'normal' market behavior. Combining Marilyn Strathern’stheoretical discussion of the anthropological relation with recentliteratures on infrastructures and markets, I argue that the perceivedreality of transactions is a product of how novel forms of economicknowledge are able to make sense of ‘taken for granted’ behavioral patternswithin digital platforms of market action. The intent that constitutes‘real’ trades is therefore a product of how market participants, economicexperts and the courts interpret the operational underbelly of markets andthe relations that they produce.


2000 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
pp. 347-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
GILLES O. ZUMBACH ◽  
MICHEL M. DACOROGNA ◽  
JØRGEN L. OLSEN ◽  
RICHARD B. OLSEN

Analogous to the Richter scale for earthquakes, we introduce the Scale of Market Shocks (SMS), an "event" scale to quantify the size of shocks in financial markets. It is based on price volatilities and computed by integrating volatilities over time horizons ranging from 1 hour to 42 days. The SMS is computed using quality high frequency market data and can be constructed for any market. We compute the SMS for the foreign exchange market. For two major FX rates, we study the relation between SMS peaks and major "world events". We measure also the correlation between the Scale of Market Shocks index and the size of the subsequent price movements and show a high correlation for short time intervals.


Market protection mechanisms work well during calm periods, but some fail miserably during slowdowns, at just the time we need them to work. When the market environment turns inhospitable, the accelerators take over from the brakes. This article frames the issues concerning oversight mechanisms, which enabled the crisis, and structural mechanisms, which in many ways advanced it. We detail the potential for competition for clients to interfere with the objective judgment of three financial markets gatekeepers: the credit rating agencies, auditors, and asset pricing firms. Any perceived bias in the quality of gatekeeping services can undermine market confidence. We then explore regulatory and contractual shortcomings that, in the event of a downturn or crisis in confidence, can exacerbate a narrow complication. In addition to the classic lemons problems in the context of information asymmetries, the tight relationship between ratings and prices perpetuate any re-rating or repricing scenarios—they combine to create an overwhelming downward force. Serious action is required. If unattended, these shortcomings leave our economy needlessly exposed to the same crisis-era systemic risk concerns that present themselves when downturns can spiral, unrestrained, into meltdowns.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julien Chevallier

The original contribution of this paper is to empirically document the contagion of the Covid-19 on financial markets. We merge databases from Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Center, Oxford-Man Institute Realized Library, NYU Volatility Lab, and St-Louis Federal Reserve Board. We deploy three types of models throughout our experiments: (i) the Susceptible-Infective-Removed (SIR) that predicts the infections’ peak on 2020-03-27; (ii) volatility (GARCH), correlation (DCC), and risk-management (Value-at-Risk (VaR)) models that relate how bears painted Wall Street red; and, (iii) data-science trees algorithms with forward prunning, mosaic plots, and Pythagorean forests that crunch the data on confirmed, deaths, and recovered Covid-19 cases and then tie them to high-frequency data for 31 stock markets.


2008 ◽  
pp. 224-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Takahashi ◽  
Satoru Takahashi ◽  
Takao Terano

This chapter develops an agent-based model to analyze microscopic and macroscopic links between investor behaviors and price fluctuations in a financial market. This analysis focuses on the effects of Passive Investment Strategy in a financial market. From the extensive analyses, we have found that (1) Passive Investment Strategy is valid in a realistic efficient market, however, it could have bad influences such as instability of market and inadequate asset pricing deviations, and (2) under certain assumptions, Passive Investment Strategy and Active Investment Strategy could coexist in a Financial Market.


In the earliest days of empirical work in academic finance, the size effect was the first market anomaly to challenge the standard asset pricing model and prompt debates about market efficiency. The notion that small stocks have higher average returns than large stocks, even after risk adjustment, was a path-breaking discovery, and for decades it has been taken as an unwavering fact of financial markets. In practice, the discovery of the size effect fueled a crowd of small-cap indexes and active funds to the point that the investment landscape is now segmented into large and small stock universes. However, despite its long and illustrious history in academia and its commonplace acceptance in practice, there is still confusion and debate about the size effect. We examine many claims about the size effect and aim to clarify some of the misunderstanding surrounding it by performing simple tests using publicly available data. For one, using 90+ years of U.S. data, there is no evidence of a pure size effect; moreover, it may not have existed in the first place, if not for data errors and insufficient adjustments for risk and liquidity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document