abstract: It is important to understand the coordinated performance of cells in tissue. One possible mechanism in this coordination involves intracellular $\rm
  Ca^{2+}$ signaling. The topology of intercellular connections in tissue should also play an important role in this process. It is most relevant for plane tissues, in which the interaction between cells is due to gap junctions (epithelium, blood vessels). We demonstrate the importance of the topology of intercellular connectivity by investigating the properties of a model of $\rm
  Ca^{2+}$ signaling for a small number of connected cells.
author: I.V. Dokukina$^{a,c}$, M.E.Gracheva$^{b}$, E.A.Grachev$^{c}$, and J.D.Gunton$^{a}$
$^{a}$Department of Physics, Lehigh University, PA 18015, USA
$^{b}$University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, Urbana,
IL 61801, USA
$^{c}$Faculty of Physics, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia
title: Role of network connectivity in intercellular calcium signaling

**Key words:** calcium signaling, gap junction, intercellular, topology.

**E-mail addresses of all authors:**
Irina V. Dokukina: email@example.com
Maria E. Gracheva: firstname.lastname@example.com
Eugene A. Grachev: email@example.com; email@example.com
James D. Gunton: firstname.lastname@example.com

**Corresponding author:** Irina V. Dokukina. Permanent address: Moscow State University, Faculty of Physics, building 2, room 2-40a, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119992, Russian Federation. Phone: 7-(495)-939-4178. E-mail address: email@example.com.

# Introduction

Calcium ions ($\rm Ca^{2+}$) are one of the universal regulators of various intra- and intercellular processes . In the presence of connections between cells, when each cell is a piece of tissue, $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signal can be passed from cell to cell as intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave . The importance of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling (among other secondary messengers) in the coordinated performance of cells in tissues is currently under investigation. These waves have been seen in a variety of cell types , , , . Intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves can be initiated by a focal mechanical, electrical, or hormonal stimulus. Often such waves travel from cell to cell in an oscillatory manner, thus forming periodic intercellular calcium waves , .

Intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling may occur through different pathways, for example through paracrine or junctional routes. In recent study it was shown for astrocytes that propagation of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves in glia is essentially determined by both gap junctions between cells and paracrine signaling by ATP, other nucleotides and/or their metabolites. A detailed theoretical and experimental study of calcium oscillations in astrocytes doublets and linearly coupled triplets is given by Ullah et al. . A model of intercellular calcium waves based on the action of calcium as a second messenger in paracrine signal transduction via calcium sensing receptor was proposed by Gracheva and Gunton and extended for a linear chain of cells by Kepseu and Woafo .

Liver, blood vessels, brain and epithelium are very good examples of tissues in which cells are connected with each other by gap junctions. It was shown by experiments and modeling that mechanically stimulated intercellular $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ waves in epithelial, glial and endothelial cells can result from the diffusion of inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate ($\rm IP_{3}$) through gap junctions , , . Although $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ can move through gap junctions, a cellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave is the cellular response to a diffusing of $\rm IP_{3}$, passing between cells via gap junctions and consequently participating in the release of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ ions from the intracellular stores. However, in contrast with these cell types, the amount of $\rm IP_{3}$ diffusing through the gap junctions in connected hepatocytes is insufficient to induce a $\rm Ca^{2+}$ response , , , . Thus, models based on the passive diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ between adjacent cells through gap junctions cannot account for apparent intercellular $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ waves in hepatocytes. Hoefer has proposed an alternative mechanism of intercellular calcium waves in hepatocytes, based on the diffusion of cytosolic calcium through gap junctions. Stochastic versions of both the and models are given by Gracheva et al. . Clair et al. have also shown that an agonist receptor gradient could be responsible for the apparent undirectional $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves observed in multiplets or in perfused intact livers. In this case, the main factor influencing $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation in hepatocytes is the cellular distribution of agonist receptors.

In addition, Tsaneva-Atanasova et al. have shown for pancreatic acinar cells that intercellular calcium diffusion is necessary and sufficient to synchronize $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations in neighboring cells, whereas the function of intercellular $\rm IP_{3}$ diffusion is to provide the propagation of oscillating $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves in tissue.

In all the above mentioned models the junctional permeability was chosen to be constant. However, since calcium ions can close gap junctions , , this would appear to pose an obstacle to the propagation of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves via gap junctions. Fortunately, this apparent paradox can be resolved by considering the temporal aspects of these responses. It is known that extended exposure to high concentrations of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ ($> 10~\rm \mu M$) results in the closure of gap junctions , . It also appears that physiological concentrations of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ can reversibly close gap junctions but this response takes about $30~\rm s$ . Thus, because $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves propagate faster than the proposed closure times , the two possible intercellular messengers ($\rm Ca^{2+}$ and $\rm IP_{3}$) , can diffuse to adjacent cells to propagate the wave before $\rm Ca^{2+}$ closes the gap junctions. Therefore, it would seem that a more accurate description of the gap junction permeability requires taking into account its dependence on the cytosolic calcium concentration, rather than treating it as a constant as in the earlier models , , , .

We believe that an important issue in modeling intercellular calcium signaling is to account for the cellular topology of the tissue. As a rule, flat tissues are modeled in the form of a two-dimensional square grid , . However, in reality, the structure of even flat tissues is significantly more complicated. Even small areas of tissue can exhibit different topological types of cell connections between each other , . In addition, in the case of local stimulation in which only one cell (not the entire tissue) is stimulated, it is important to know which cell is stimulated (for the same structure of cell connections). Thus, the aim of our study is to investigate the relation between the topology of cellular connectivity in flat tissues and the corresponding intercellular calcium signaling.

Since gap junctions ensure a strict topology of intercellular connections, we take into account in our study only tissues in which cells are connected with each other by gap junctions and the main mechanism of intercellular $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation is a diffusion of a second messenger through these gap junctions. We do not exclude the possible influence of extracellular pathways on the intercellular calcium signaling. However, for the sake of clarity and simplicity, in this work we omit taking into account any second messenger diffusion through the extracellular matrix, which could be relevant, for example, in astrocytic networks . In our model, we take into account only the diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ through gap junctions as the main mechanism of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation in tissue , , . Also we include in our model the dependence of gap junctional conductance on concentration of cytosolic $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ .

# The model description

We use the minimal model as the basis of our model of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling. In this model the total constant entry of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ into the cytosol is $\nu_{0}+\nu_{1}\beta$. This includes the influx $\nu_{0}$ from the extracellular medium and the $\rm IP_{3}$-stimulated $\rm Ca^{2+}$ release $\nu_{1}\beta$ ($\beta$ is the degree of saturation of the $\rm IP_{3}$ receptor). It is more convenient for us to include in the model an explicit dependence on the $\rm IP_{3}$ concentration in cell. Therefore we replace the $\rm IP_{3}$-stimulated $\rm Ca^{2+}$ release $\nu_{1}\beta$ in by its linear dependence on $\rm IP_{3}$: $k_{inIP_{3}}IP_{3}$.

We also include gap junction tunneling between nearby cells. In order to model $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation the $\rm IP_{3}$ stimulus (which mimics the local application of a stimulus) is applied only to the first cell. We model this stimulus induced $\rm IP_{3}$ as following function of time for the first cell: $$IP_3^{(stimulus)}=\left\{ \begin{array}{l} IP_3^{(max)}\cdot \frac{t}{t_1}, 0<t<t_1,\\
IP_3^{(max)}, t_1\leq t\leq t_2,
\\ 0, t>t_2,
 \end{array}\right.$$ where $t$ – time, $t_1$ – time moment by which $IP_3$ reaches its maximal value $IP_3^{(max)}$; $t_2$ - time moment at which $\rm IP_{3}$ stimulation is interrupted. Thus, we formulate the rate of $\rm IP_{3}$ synthesis $J_{synt}$ as follows: $$J_{synt}=k_{rate} IP_3^{(stimulus)}.$$ Modeling the agonist generated $\rm IP_{3}$ concentration by such function is more convenient numerically than, for example, using a square impulse. In addition, we add to the model a term describing the degradation of $\rm IP_{3}$ in each of the cells: $$J_{deg}=\frac{V_{p}IP_{3}k_{p}}{k_{p}+IP_{3}}, \label{eq3}$$ where $k_p$ is the half maximal rate of $IP_3$ degradation . Without this term, the calcium levels reach unphysiological values in the asymptotic time limit . The values of all the parameters are given in Table .

Lazrak et al. have shown that during the fast increase of cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$ concentration in each of the coupled adjacent cells (from $0.2~\rm \mu M$ to $1~\rm \mu M$), the gap junctional conductance decreases from $100~\%$ to $0~\%$. During the subsequent return of the level of cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$ to its normal value (about $0.2~\rm \mu M$), the gap junctional conductance recovers with practically the same rate as its previous decrease (see Fig. 3 in ). This means that during each oscillation of cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$ in one of two adjacent cells, the gap junctions between these cells are transiently closed. However, this closure does not occur instantaneously, but during an interval of about $30~\rm s$. Relying on these data (Fig. 3 in ), we model the fast changes in the gap junctional conductance $\gamma_{ij}$ between adjacent cells $i$ and $j$ by the following function: $$\gamma_{ij}=\frac{k_{ij}^n}{Ca_{cytMax(ij)}^n+k_{G}^n},
\label{eq4}$$ where $Ca_{cytMax(ij)}$ is the larger of the two cytosolic calcium concentrations in cells $i$ and $j$. Thus, $\gamma_{ij}=1$ corresponds to a $100~\%$ conductive gap junction between cell $i$ and $j$. For other parameters see Table . The gap junctional conductance in Fig. 3 in decreases very rapidly, even with a small increase of cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$. Therefore we choose $n=5$ in the function () (see Fig. 1). The diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ provides the mechanism of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation in our model.

Thus, the evolution of our system is described by the following differential equations (cf. , for parameter values see Table ): $$\frac{{dCa_{cyt(i)} }} {{dt}} = k_{in}+k_{inIP_{3}}IP_{3(i)} -
k_{out}Ca_{cyt(i)} + \nonumber$$ $$+(k_{pool}Ca_{pool(i)}+k_{rel}\frac{Ca_{pool(i)}^2}{K_{1}^{2}+Ca_{pool(i)}^{2}}\frac{Ca_{cyt(i)}^{4}}{K_{2}^{2}+Ca_{cyt(i)}^{4}})
-  k_{serca}\frac{Ca_{cyt(i)}^2}{K_{3}^2+Ca_{cyt(i)}^2},
\label{eq1}$$ $$\frac{{dCa_{pool(i)} }} {{dt}} =
k_{serca}\frac{Ca_{cyt(i)}^2}{K_{3}^2+Ca_{cyt(i)}^2} -  \nonumber$$ $$-k_{rel}\frac{Ca_{pool(i)}^2}{K_{1}^{2}+Ca_{pool(i)}^{2}}\frac{Ca_{cyt(i)}^{4}}{K_{2}^{2}+Ca_{cyt(i)}^{4}}-k_{pool}Ca_{pool(i)},
\label{eq2}$$ $$\frac{dIP_{3(i)}}{dt}=J_{synt}-J_{deg}+k_{gap}\gamma_{ij}(IP_{3(j)}-IP_{3(i)})+k_{gap}\gamma_{ik}(IP_{3(k)}-IP_{3(i)}),
\label{eq5}$$ where the indices $i$, $j$ and $k$ denote the cell number, and $k_{gap}$ is the coefficient of gap junctional communication for $\rm IP_{3}$ (see Table ).

Thus, the index triplets $(ijk)=(120)=(210)$ correspond to just two coupled cells with only $k_{12}=k_{21} \neq 0$. The case in which $(ijk)=(100)$, $Ca_{cytMax(ij)}=Ca_{cyt(1)}$ and all junctional coefficients are equal to zero corresponds to just one cell. This is equivalent to equations for intracellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling. It is also worth noting that in the case of index pairs $(ijk)=(123)=(213)=(312)$ there are three possible different configurations of three coupled cells. If $k_{13}=0$, we have a one-dimensional chain of cells, with the first cell interacting only with the second cell, the second cell interacting with both the first and third cells and the third cell interacting only with the second cell (see Fig. 2 A). The same linear chain with other orderings of the cells is shown in Fig. 2 B. If none of the junctional coefficients vanish, each cell interacts with two other cells (see Fig. 2 C). The right side of Fig. 2 shows graphs that correspond to these three configurations.

The system can be easily generalized to the case of more than three cells. For example, all the configurations in two dimensions of four coupled cells are shown in Fig. 3. All these are biologically realistic in two dimensions. Examples of real cellular configurations in vitro are shown in Fig. 1 and 2 in and Fig. 9 and 11 in . The system of cells 1, 2, 3, 7 in Fig. 1a in (if the rest of the cells are removed) corresponds to the topological configuration in Fig. 3 A (cell 3 or 7 should be stimulated) and 3 B (cell 1 or 2 should be stimulated) in our study. The system of cells 1, 2, 5, 7 in Fig. 1a in (if the rest of the cells are removed) corresponds to the topological configuration in Fig. 3 C (cell 5 should be stimulated), 3 D (cell 2 or 7 should be stimulated) and 3 E (cell 1 should be stimulated) in our study. The system of cells 1, 3, 5, 7 in Fig. 1a in (if the rest of the cells are removed) corresponds to the topological configuration in Fig. 3 F (cell 1 should be stimulated) and 3 G (cell 3, 5 or 7 should be stimulated) and the system of cells in Fig. 9 in corresponds to the topological configuration in Fig. 3 F (cell B should be stimulated) and 3 G (cell A, C or D should be stimulated) in our study. The systems of cells in Fig. 1c and Fig. 2 in and in Fig. 11 in correspond to the topological configuration in Fig. 3 I and 3 J in the present paper. Finally, we believe that it is possible to extract the configuration shown in Fig. 3 H from a variety of cellular tissues.

# Results

We first consider the case of two cells. The first cell is stimulated from 0 s to $t_2=14$ s with $IP_3^{(max)}=4.2~\rm \mu M$ applied at $t_1=4.2$ s (see Fig. 4). Some $\rm IP_{3}$ from this impulse dissociates as $J_{deg}$ (eq. ()). The remainder of $\rm IP_{3}$ diffuses into the second cell through gap junctions. The concentration of $\rm IP_{3}$, which is received as the result of all these processes in the first cell, is shown on Fig. 5 ($IP_{3(1)}$ from $0~\rm s$ to $14~\rm s$). The concentration of $\rm IP_{3}$ which diffused into the second cell as the result of diffusion through gap junctions from the first cell is shown in Fig. 5 ($IP_{3(2)}$ from $0~\rm s$ to $14~\rm s$). The change of $\rm IP_{3}$ in both cells occurs in this period by large advances, rather than smoothly. This is connected with the fact that the gap junctional conductance between cells is changed according to $\gamma_{ij}$ (eq. ()), rather than remaining constant all the time. Thus, as gap junctions are completely closed at a high concentration of cytosolic $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ in any two cells, the diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ through them temporarily ceases.

Cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations in the model cell occur at concentrations of $\rm IP_{3}$ about $1~\rm \mu M$. This concentration of $\rm IP_{3}$ is the required level in the second cell that occurs at a time later than in the first cell. Therefore, the cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations in the second cell arise after a certain time delay (see Fig. 6). We find in our model an inverse dependence of this time delay on the amplitude of the impulse of $\rm IP_{3}$ which is applied to the first cell (see Fig. 6).

For more than two connected cells, our model shows that the propagation of calcium waves depends on the spatial configuration of cells; this may be interpreted as the first indication of heterogeneity in intercellular $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation. There are three possible configurations of interactions between three cells (see Fig. 2). If the location of the two neighboring cells is symmetric with respect to the first cell (Fig. 2 B, C), than one can see similar oscillations in both the second and third cells, following an initial delay of about $2~\rm s$ from the onset of oscillations in the first cell. In the case of a linear chain (Fig. 2 A), there is a difference in the calcium oscillations in the second and third cells. There is not only a delay time between the onset of calcium oscillations in the first and second cells, but also between the second and third cells (both delay times are about $6~\rm s$). The value of this delay time slightly differs from that found in , . This is due to the different choice of parameter values in the two studies.

We also briefly describe the results for the case of four connected cells. The results for all configurations of four cells are summarized in Tables 2 – 4. We note that we study only in-plane (two-dimensional) cell configurations. It is possible to distinguish five different configurations of four cells on a plane. However, for the same topological configuration of cells, the $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ signaling greatly depends on which cell in the structure is stimulated. Taking into account this fact, we identify ten cell configurations. As in the case of three cells, the dynamics of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ in cells symmetrically positioned with respect to the stimulated cell is identical; for example, see configurations "A", "B", "C", "E", "F", "G" and "H" in Fig. 3. This holds when all the cells in these configurations are indistinguishable. Also, this assumption allows us to study the dependence of the intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling only on the topology of the cell to cell connections in a given cell configuration.

We now discuss the key features of signaling in four cells configurations. For example, in the case of configuration "H" (Fig. 3 H) the first cell has two connections with adjacent cells (there are four connections between cells altogether) and we find very good calcium wave propagation between cells (see Fig. 7). Also, the dynamics of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ in cells 2 and 3, which are positioned symmetrically with respect to the stimulated cell 1, is the same (see Tables 2 and 4, Fig. 7). The delay time between the onset of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations in the stimulated cell and the beginning of oscillations in all other cells in the configuration depends on the ordering number of neighbors of a given cell. In the case of a direct connection with the first simulated cell (first order neighbors) the delay time varies from $2~\rm s$ to $4~\rm s$ (see Table 3). For example, in configuration "I" cell 2 is the first order neighbor of cell 1. For a second order neighbor, there is one additional cell between the stimulated cell and a given cell. For example, in configuration "I" cell 3 is the second order neighbor for cell 1. For second order neighbors, the time delay for onset of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillation varies from $4~\rm s$ to $11~\rm
s$; this is larger then in the case of the first order neighbors (see Table 3). In addition, for cells next to the stimulated cell there is a difference in response depending on the presence or absence of connections with other second order neighbors (compare cell 3 and cell 4 in configurations "C" and "G", Tables 2 – 4). This suggests a heterogeneity in the $\rm Ca^{2+}$ response in these cell networks. Of course, larger cell networks would have to be studied to strengthen this conclusion. For in-plane configurations of four cells there is only one neighbor of third order which is present in configuration "I". For the given parameters there are no oscillations in cell 4 of configuration "I", as indicated in Tables 2 – 4 and Fig. 8.

Thus, each cell configuration can be characterized by a definite set of neighbors of each order; moreover, the propagation of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves for each configuration depends on this set. According to the set of neighbors, all cell configurations can be divided into four classes:

-   one neighbor of first order, one neighbor of second order, one neighbor of third order (configuration "I");

-   one neighbor of first order, two neighbors of second order (configurations "C", "G");

-   two neighbors of first order, one neighbor of second order (configurations "A", "D", "H", "J");

-   three neighbors of first order (configurations "B", "E", "F").

A fast decline of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves is characteristic of the first two classes, whereas a steady expansion of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves is characteristic of the last two classes (see Tables 2 – 4). For example, in the case of configuration "C" (Fig. 3 C) the first cell has only one connection with another cell (there are four connections between all cells, as in "H") and this results in a decreased range of the calcium wave propagation from the first cell (see Fig. 7). There is an even stronger decrease in the range of wave propagation in the case of configuration "I", which is a linear chain of four cells (see Fig. 8).

We now consider some interesting configurations of four cells in more detail. Configuration "C" (Fig. 3 C) belongs to the second class of configurations. In this configuration the cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$ displays the typical dynamics of this class, i.e., prolonged high-frequency $Ca_{cyt}$ oscillations in the first cell and shorter $Ca_{cyt}$ oscillations with lower frequency in the other cells. Cells 3 and 4 are equally spaced with respect to the first cell in configuration "C"; therefore their cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$ dynamics is identical. At the same time the total intensity of oscillations decreases with the distance from the first cell. Configuration "D" (Fig. 3 D) belongs to the third class in our classification. The topological difference between configurations "D" and "J" consists in the presence (configuration "D") and absence (configuration "J") of a connection between cells 2 and 3. This difference is manifested in $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ dynamics, primarily through small temporary distinctions (see Tables 3 and 4) and also in a weaker response in cell 2 in configuration "D", as compared with configuration "J" (see Table 4). This is connected with the fact that cell 2 in configuration "D" exchanges $\rm IP_{3}$ with cell 3 in addition to cell 1, whereas there is no such exchange in configuration "J". Note that although in configuration "D", the disposition of cells 2 and 3 in the absence of cell 4 is symmetrical relative to cell 1 (Fig. 3 D), the cytosolic $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ dynamics in cells 2 and 3 is different (see Fig. 7). This is the result of the fact that cell 4 is an additional neighbor of cell 3, and an additional exchange of $\rm IP_{3}$ between these two cells takes place. That exchange decreases the duration of oscillations in cell 3 in comparison with cell 2 in configuration "D" (see Fig. 7).

We find one more interesting regularity in the case of different configurations for four cells. We calculate the sum of the durations of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations (last column in Table 2) and the sum of the number of peaks of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations (last column in Table 4) in all four cells, for each configuration. Then we divide this total number of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations by the corresponding total duration of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations for each configuration and determine the mean frequency of oscillation for each configuration (Fig. 9). There is obviously a good correlation of this mean frequency with the classes of configurations described above. In other words, we find a correlation of each configuration class with a mean frequency for this class. This regularity allows us to conclude that the topology of the graph of intercellular connections has a more important influence on intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling than one might think at first glance.

We find that a variable gap junctional conductance can significantly influence the range of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation. This is most clear for the chain of four cells (configuration "I", Fig. 3 I). If the gap junctional conductance is described by $\gamma_{ij}$ (eq. ()), $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ oscillations take place only in cells 1, 2 and 3, but the $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ wave does not reach cell 4 (Fig. 8). If the gap junctional conductance is constant and independent of $Ca_{cyt}$ ($\gamma_{ij}=1$), $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations take place in all four cells of configuration "I" (Fig. 10). Therefore, even a brief closure of the gap junctions between cells has a strong effect on the propagation of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves.

We also consider the effect of varying the parameter $k_G$ on the range of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation. If one increases $k_G$, the gap junctional conductance $\gamma_{ij}$ decreases. For configuration "I" with $k_G=0.45~\rm \mu M$, such a decrease of $\gamma_{ij}$ results in an abrupt limitation of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation. In this case, more intensive $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations with increased frequency and duration in comparison with $k_G=0.4~\rm  \mu M$ (see Fig. 8) take place in the first cell. In the second cell the frequency of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations became appreciably smaller in comparison with $k_G=0.4~\rm  \mu M$, whereas in the third and fourth cells there is only a negligible increase in cytosolic $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ above its baseline value. If one decreases $k_G$, the gap junctional conductance $\gamma_{ij}$ increases. For configuration "I" with $k_G=0.35~\rm
\mu M$ the corresponding increase in $\gamma_{ij}$ results in an increase in the range of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ waves and higher frequency oscillations similar to $\gamma_{ij}=1$ at $k_G=0.4~\rm \mu M$ (Fig. 10).

Finally, we find the following results for all the configurations. First (denoted as A below), with a constant gap junctional conductance ($\gamma_{ij}=1$), the number of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations and their total duration increase, in contrast to the case with a variable $\gamma_{ij}(Ca_{cyt})$. Second (denoted as B below), several things remain the same whether or not the gap junction conductance varies with concentration. These include the response of symmetrically positioned cells, the general dependence of frequency and duration of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations in a cell on the number of its direct neighbors, and the relation between the time delays from the onset of oscillations in the first cell to the first oscillations in the other cells of the configuration.

The above-mentioned features are the consequence of $\rm IP_{3}$ diffusion through the gap junctions. At the same time a variable gap junctional conductance influences only the absolute (rather than relative) values of $\rm
IP_{3}$. Thus, independently of whether there is a variable or constant gap junctional conductance, the qualitative dynamics of cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$ during intercellular signaling for different topological configurations of cellular connections remain the same. This conclusion remains true if a different model of intracellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ is used. Thus, the topology of cellular connections determines the signaling.

The first features (A) described above are the consequence of the different absolute values of $\rm IP_3$ which are acquired by each cell in configurations with open and closed gap junctions. In the case of the features (B), it is not important how much $\rm IP_3$ has arrived in a cell, since these are relative characteristics, and only the relative amount of $\rm IP_3$ which moves between neighboring cells is important. For example, it is important whether the neighboring cells obtained equal amounts of $\rm IP_3$ or not; if not, the difference in the amounts is important. Thus features (A) are absolute characteristics of the oscillations, and are determined by the behavior of the gap junctions, whereas features (B) are relative characteristics of the values in cells (of a given configuration) with respect to each other and are determined by the topological structure.

Next, we plot in Fig. 11, the same diagram as in Fig. 9, but for the case of $\gamma_{ij}=1$. We find that we can distinguish only the first ("I") and the second ("C", "G") configuration classes, but we cannot distinguish between the third and fourth classes in our configuration classification. To conclude, a variable gap junctional conductance has a modulating influence on intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling by reinforcing the role of the cellular connection topology, but leaves the qualitative aspects unchanged.

We have also considered $\rm Ca^{2+}$ diffusion through the gap junctions between cells, in addition to $\rm IP_3$ diffusion between cells. We thus added an exchange term to eq. () in the form $k_{gap}\gamma_{ij}(Ca_{cyt(j)}-Ca_{cyt(i)})$, similar to eq. (). The results we obtain allow us to conclude that there are two separate mechanisms involved in intercellular signaling. First, $\rm IP_3$ diffusion provides the mechanism for calcium wave propagation between cells, as was proposed in . Second, the diffusion of $\rm Ca^{2+}$, is necessary (in addition to $\rm IP_3$ diffusion), to synchronize the oscillations among the neighboring cells. Similar conclusions were drawn by Tsaneva-Atanasova et al. , which are in complete agreement with this work.

# Conclusion

Intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling is a complex and nonlinear process; its mechanism depends on the kind of tissue and the method used to stimulate the cells. In this work we study only plane tissues, cells of which are connected to each other by gap junctions, such as epithelium and blood vessels. We suggest that the diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ through gap junctions is the main mechanism for intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation in such tissues. That is, we consider intercellular topological structures which are common to epithelium and endothelial tissues, but we do not model the details of the intracellular signaling specific to these cell types.

The intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation in airway epithelial cell cultures arises as the result of mechanical stimulation of a single cell in the tissue . The front of this wave is heterogeneous in different directions; thus one can observe many kinds of "branches", "paws" and so on, as well as an oblongness of the front on a whole in some directions . The reasons for such a heterogeneous wave propagation might include both the heterogeneity of the tissue structure (for example, the different number of gap junctions in the boundaries between adjacent cells, the different number of neighbors for each cell, the different shape of cells and so on), and the internal heterogeneity of the cellular structure (I.V.Dokukina, M.E.Gracheva, E.A.Grachev - unpublished results). In the current study we show that different numbers of neighbors results in a heterogeneity of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ wave propagation, while varying the gap junctional conductance amplifies this influence.

We believe that the topology of intercellular connections in tissue has an essential influence on $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling. We demonstrate this influence for the case of a small (three of four) number of cells, using the minimal model for the description of intracellular processes. In addition, we take into account the dependence of the gap junctional conductance on the cellular concentration of cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$. Even in the simplest case of three cells we find differences in $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling between the linear chain of three cells (Fig. 2 A) and the closed chain in which each cell is connected to its adjacent cells (Fig. 2 C). We find a stronger influence of the topological structure of intercellular connections on $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling for different configurations of four cells. We classify all possible plane configurations of four cells in four different categories, depending on the number of neighbors of a definite order. We find that the type of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling in each configuration depends on the class of this configuration. Furthermore we find that by knowing the mean frequency of $\rm
Ca^{2+}$ oscillations in any configuration, it is possible to refer this configuration to one of the four categories.

Our results suggest that during any investigations of intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling in a particular tissue, it is necessary to pay attention to the possible influence of the topology of cellular connections. This is most important for small pieces of tissue, because in this case the influence of topology is most evident. Note that we consider only two-dimensional configurations of cells in this paper. However, it would be interesting to consider the role of topological structure in three-dimensional tissues, which is a subject of our future research. Also, Tsaneva-Atanasova et al. have shown that an analysis of the point-oscillator model is insufficient to determine which kinds of oscillations will appear in clusters of pancreatic acinar cells with realistic geometries. They also find that geometrical factors play a crucial role in both intra- and intercellular $\rm Ca^{2+}$ signaling. Therefore, it is important to carry out a study of spatially distributed models of the most interesting topological configurations of cellular connections.

While modeling the intercellular calcium signaling it is necessary to recognize that the transition from one cell to tissue is not a simple quantitative conversion. It is not a transition from one cell to a chain of cells or some grid of cells; rather, it is a more complex transition defined by the topology of tissue. We have shown that the dynamics of tissue in small areas (and also in larger regions – I.V. Dokukina, A.A. Tsukanov, M.E. Gracheva, E.A. Grachev, unpublished results) is defined not by a chain or grid of cells, but by the topology of the connection graph of cells with each other. It is possible to judge the tissue topology from the dynamics of signaling; in turn, the tissue topology can change the intercellular signaling dynamics, enforcing its own rhythm. Thus, the intercellular dynamics of calcium and the corresponding topology of cell connections form an unbroken, complete system.

# Acknowledgments

This research was supported in part by grants from the National Science Foundation (DMR0302598), and the G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Charitable Foundation.

**Figure Captions**

Fig. 1. Behavior of function $\gamma_{ij}=\frac{k_{ij}^n}{Ca_{cytMax(ij)}^n+k_{G}^n}$ for different values of the power $n$. Here $k_{ij}=1~\rm \mu M$ at $n=5$, $k_{ij}=1.84~\rm \mu M$ at $n=3$ and $k_{ij}=3.94~\rm \mu M$ at $n=2$. We represent $\gamma_{ij}$ in percentile form, or in other words normalize $\gamma_{ij}$ by $max(\gamma_{ij})$ to obtain the percentile value of $\gamma_{ij}$ from its maximum. For other parameters see Table .

Fig. 2. Different structures of connections between three cells. The grey color of cell 1 means that this cell is stimulated. The right side shows graphs that correspond to each configuration.

Fig. 3. Different structures of connections between four cells. The grey color of cell 1 means that this cell is stimulated. The right side shows graphs that correspond to each cell configuration.

Fig. 4. Schematic representation of stimulus induced $\rm IP_{3}$ as a function of time.

Fig. 5. Intercellular calcium signaling between two cells based on diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ through gap junctions. Gap junctional conductance depends on cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$. For all parameters see Table .

Fig. 6. The dependence of the time delay between initiation of oscillations in the first (stimulated) and the second cells on the amplitude of the initial impulse of $\rm IP_{3}$ in the first cell.

Fig. 7. Intercellular calcium signaling between four cells of configurations "C", "D" and "H" (Fig. 3 C, D and H) based on diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ through gap junctions. Gap junctional conductance depends on cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$. For all parameters see Table .

Fig. 8. Intercellular calcium signaling between four cells of configuration "I" (Fig. 3 I) based on diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ through gap junctions. Gap junctional conductance depends on cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$. For all parameters see Table .

Fig. 9. Axis X: all configurations for four cells are separated into four different categories, taking into account the number of neighbors (see text for details). Axis Y: the mean frequency of oscillation for all cells of each configuration ($\rm mean~frequency =
\frac{total~number}{total~duration}~of~all~oscillations$) with $\gamma_{ij}(Ca_{cyt})$.

Fig. 10. Intercellular calcium signaling between four cells of configuration "I" (Fig. 3 I) based on diffusion of $\rm IP_{3}$ through gap junctions. Gap junctional conductance does not depend on cytosolic $\rm Ca^{2+}$. For all parameters see Table .

Fig. 11. Axis X: all configurations for four cells are separated into four different categories, taking into account the number of neighbors (see text for details). Axis Y: the mean frequency of oscillation for all cells of each configuration ($\rm mean~frequency =
\frac{total~number}{total~duration}~of~all~oscillations$) with $\gamma_{ij}=1$.

| Designation    | Parameter values            |
|:---------------|:----------------------------|
| $k_{in}$       | $1~\rm \mu M\cdot s^{-1}$   |
| $k_{out}$      | $6~\rm s^{-1}$              |
| $k_{inIP_{3}}$ | $1~\rm s^{-1}$              |
| $k_{pool}$     | $1~\rm s^{-1}$              |
| $k_{rel}$      | $500~\rm \mu M\cdot s^{-1}$ |
| $k_{serca}$    | $65~\rm \mu M\cdot s^{-1}$  |
| $K_{1}$        | $2~\rm \mu M$               |
| $K_{2}$        | $0.9~\rm \mu M$             |
| $K_{3}$        | $1~\rm \mu M$               |
| $V_{p}$        | $0.01~\rm s^{-1}$           |
| $k_{p}$        | $1~\rm \mu M$               |
| $k_{ij}$       | $1~\rm \mu M$               |
| $k_{G}$        | $0.4~\rm \mu M$             |
| $k_{gap}$      | $0.005~\rm s^{-1}$          |
| $k_{rate}$     | $1~\rm s^{-1}$              |

Model parameters

| Configuration | Cell 1 | Cell 2 | Cell 3 | Cell 4 | Total  |
|:--------------|:-------|:-------|:-------|:-------|:-------|
| $A$           | $19$   | $14.5$ | $14.5$ | $15.8$ | $63.8$ |
| $B$           | $18.7$ | $14.6$ | $14.6$ | $14.6$ | $62.5$ |
| $C$           | $19.7$ | $15$   | $10.3$ | $10.3$ | $55.3$ |
| $D$           | $17.6$ | $16.7$ | $14.6$ | $13.6$ | $62.5$ |
| $E$           | $18.7$ | $14.6$ | $14.6$ | $14.6$ | $62.5$ |
| $F$           | $18.7$ | $14.6$ | $14.6$ | $14.6$ | $62.5$ |
| $G$           | $19.7$ | $15$   | $10.3$ | $10.3$ | $55.3$ |
| $H$           | $19$   | $14.5$ | $14.5$ | $15.8$ | $63.8$ |
| $I$           | $21.4$ | $15.4$ | $7.5$  | –      | $44.3$ |
| $J$           | $16.9$ | $18$   | $16.4$ | $11.4$ | $62.7$ |

Duration of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations (s)

| Configuration | Cell 2 | Cell 3 | Cell 4 |
|:--------------|:-------|:-------|:-------|
| $A$           | $2.5$  | $2.5$  | $4$    |
| $B$           | $2$    | $2$    | $2$    |
| $C$           | $4$    | $8.5$  | $8.5$  |
| $D$           | $2$    | $2.5$  | $5.5$  |
| $E$           | $2$    | $2$    | $2$    |
| $F$           | $2$    | $2$    | $2$    |
| $G$           | $4$    | $8.5$  | $8.5$  |
| $H$           | $2.5$  | $2.5$  | $4$    |
| $I$           | $3$    | $11$   | –      |
| $J$           | $2$    | $3$    | $7.5$  |

Time delay from the beginning of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations in the first cell (s)

| Configuration | Cell 1 | Cell 2 | Cell 3 | Cell 4 | Total |
|:--------------|:-------|:-------|:-------|:-------|:------|
| $A$           | $9$    | $6$    | $6$    | $6$    | $27$  |
| $B$           | $8$    | $6$    | $6$    | $6$    | $26$  |
| $C$           | $13$   | $6$    | $4$    | $4$    | $27$  |
| $D$           | $9$    | $7$    | $6$    | $5$    | $27$  |
| $E$           | $8$    | $6$    | $6$    | $6$    | $26$  |
| $F$           | $8$    | $6$    | $6$    | $6$    | $26$  |
| $G$           | $13$   | $6$    | $4$    | $4$    | $27$  |
| $H$           | $9$    | $6$    | $6$    | $6$    | $27$  |
| $I$           | $15$   | $7$    | $3$    | –      | $25$  |
| $J$           | $9$    | $8$    | $6$    | $4$    | $27$  |

The number of $\rm Ca^{2+}$ oscillations (items)


abstract: Order matching systems form the backbone of modern equity exchanges, used by millions of investors daily. Thus, their operation is strictly controlled through numerous regulatory directives to ensure that markets are fair and transparent. Despite these efforts, market manipulation remains an open problem.
  .
  In this work, we focus on a class of market manipulation techniques that exploit technical details and glitches in the operation of the exchanges (i.e., mechanical arbitrage). Such techniques are used by predatory traders with deep knowledge of the exchange's structure to gain an advantage over the other market participants. We argue that technical solutions to the problem of mechanical arbitrage have the potential to significantly thwart these practices. Our work provides the first overview of the threat landscape, models fair markets and their security assumptions, and discusses various mitigation measures.
author: Vasilios Mavroudis
bibliography: bibliography.bib
title: Market Manipulation as a Security Problem

# Introduction

From outcry pits to electronic exchanges, trading has always been a very competitive field, where even the slightest "edge" could be used to gain an advantage over the rest of the market participants. However, electronic trading gave rise to a previously unseen type of arbitrage that exploits minor technical details and glitches in the exchange's infrastructure .

These techniques are employed by traders with a very good understanding of the exchange's operations (e.g., matching system's processes, order handling rules) and usually with low-latency access to the exchange's engine (on the order of milliseconds or less). For example, traders have been found to exploit corner cases of the order-handling rules to unfairly receive execution priority over other market participants . Moreover, predatory traders use minuscule orders to uncover investors who submit hidden instructions for large blocks of equity .

While in retrospect this development was to be expected, the prevalence of such techniques caught markets off-guard, and led to various analyses and proposals by both researchers and regulatory bodies . Our work complements these (legal and finance) research efforts and argues that these phenomena cannot be sufficiently studied without examining their technical component. We decouple the study of manipulation techniques from their legal standing, and model fair exchanges based on security properties and assumptions derived from EU and US market regulations. On this basis, we examine six known mechanical manipulation techniques and investigate how they violate one or more of the aforementioned properties. The insights of this analysis are useful for the development of efficient countermeasures with minimum impact to the operation of the markets.

To better understand the existing mitigation options and their effectiveness, we also discuss and compare various technical and regulatory proposals. We conclude that technical countermeasures cannot fully replace regulators but can significantly reduce the opportunities for manipulation. This is also indicated by the small body of works introducing alternative market designs that are less prone to certain forms of mechanical arbitrage .

**Contributions.** To summarize, this paper makes the following contributions:

-   We define the security properties that fair exchanges should satisfy and introduce the adversarial model assumed by the majority of modern equity exchanges.

-   We study six known manipulation techniques, introduce their technical details, and investigate how they violate the exchange's security properties. To our knowledge, this is the first time that market manipulation techniques are studied in the "systems security" context.

-   We survey existing countermeasures and discuss their effectiveness in tackling manipulation techniques based on mechanical arbitrage.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Initially, we detail the operation of order matching systems and discuss the different order types (Section ). Subsequently, we list the basic security properties that a fair exchange should provide, and introduce a realistic model of an intelligent adversary (Section ). Section  studies the technical details of mechanical arbitrage techniques, while Section  discusses both technical and regulatory countermeasures. Section  concludes the paper.

# Background

We now outline the basic subsystems of electronic exchanges and their operation. Figure  illustrates the interactions between the different components and actors of an electronic trading system. Initially, traders ($t_i$) submit their instructions (i.e., send, cancel, modify) to the order management system (OMS) of their broker. The OMS captures the details of each incoming instruction, identifies the best execution venue, and routes it to that exchange[^1]. The received orders are then placed in the exchange's order book, where the matching engine ranks, pairs and fills them with other sell or buy orders. An order is fully matched and cleared from the book if its entire open quantity is executed, while partially matched orders are updated to list only the remaining open quantity. Most equity and cryptocurrency exchanges operate continuous markets, where orders are matched on a continuous basis and the price is determined by the highest bid and the lowest ask quotes.

Traders remain up to date with these prices either through the Stock Information Provider (SIP)[^2] or by subscribing to the trading data feeds offered by the exchanges. There are two types of such feeds: Layer 1 that provide only basic information such as real-time best bid/ask prices for securities trading in the exchange, and Layer 2 that offer quotes for all the orders resting in the order book (or up to a certain depth). In terms of latency, SIP averages at 0.09 milliseconds, while proprietary data feeds are several times faster .

Finally, to ensure that traders, brokers and exchanges operate within the legal boundaries, regulators (e.g., the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) constantly surveil the market and investigate cases of abuse such as market manipulation and insider trading. Moreover, exchanges often monitor and review trader positions and transactions (i.e., self-regulate) to avoid facilitating illegal activities .

*Dark pools* are trading venues that protect the traders' privacy by not advertising the open orders in their book. Pre-trade privacy is of great importance to institutional investors, as it enables them to submit large orders without adversely influencing the market price. Beside that, their operation is similar to that of standard exchanges (i.e., lit markets). Dark pools were initially used for equity trading, but the recent cryptocurrency burst gave rise to various new dark coin-trading venues .

## Orders Types

Trade orders are instructions sent by traders/investors to buy or sell on a venue, and are either routed through a broker or sent directly to the exchange (when participants have direct market access). We now outline a few of the hundred order types (and variants) that modern exchanges support.

*Market Orders.* This order type specifies the quantity to be sold or bought, but not the price. The exchange is responsible for filling the order at the best available price. While market orders are commonly used to quickly unload a "position", traders prefer other types that give them better control over the execution price.

*Limit Orders.* A limit order specifies a maximum or minimum price for buying or selling a number of shares. Unlike market orders, limit orders may not be executed if the price set cannot be met. Some variants allow investors to place time-limits for order execution after which the order is canceled.

*Reserve Orders.* Such orders are comprised of a displayed and a reserved (i.e., non-displayed) component (also called Iceberg orders). Once the displayed quantity is depleted to less than a round lot (i.e., the smallest order size allowed) the reserved component is used to replenish it. There are several variants realizing different replenishment strategies (e.g., fixed amount, random replenishment).

*Discretionary Orders.* This type of orders have both a displayed price and a non-displayed discretionary execution range. The exchange first tries to fill the order at the displayed price, but if this is not possible it looks for fills within the hidden discretionary range.

*Anonymous Orders.* These orders are used by investors who elect not to reveal their identity in a particular trade. Anonymous orders display a generic id in place of the unique participant's id. Regulators and authorities monitoring the market retain access to the full details of the order.

*Dark/Hidden Orders.* This class of orders provides varying degrees of pre-trade privacy, concealing parts of or all the details of an order before it is executed. They are available in both dark and lit markets and are used by investors wishing to buy or sell large volumes of stocks, options, or cryptocurrencies without influencing the market direction or sentiment. It should be noted that they do not provide any post-trade privacy, as this is prohibited by EU and US market regulations.

## Order Matching Algorithms

Order matching is the process by which exchanges pair compatible buy and sell instructions. For this purpose, each matching system uses an algorithm that considers several precedence criteria to determine which orders must be filled at any given time. This ranking process becomes of particular importance, when there are several open orders for the same security (or cryptocurrency) at the same price. Here, we outline the two most common categories of matching algorithms, while a more thorough analysis can be found in .

**Price-Time Priority.** Most equity and cryptocurrency markets use Time-based FIFO ranking. FIFO is an intuitive ranking strategy, where orders are first prioritized based on their offered price (i.e., a buyer that is willing to pay more is served first) and then based on their relative submission time (in cases of orders with the same price). For instance, given a buy order A for $200$ shares at a price $x$ that arrives before an order B for $50$ shares at the same price, the system will seek to fully fill A first, and then move on to find matches for B. Conditional order types further complicate the ranking process, as ranking algorithms need to also consider several other order precedence rules. For example, displayed orders (e.g., limit orders) have priority over all hidden order types (e.g., dark orders). Similarly, other ranking criteria are used to rank the different hidden order variants.

**Pro-Rata.** As with price-time priority, Pro-Rata algorithms prioritize first the orders that offer the best price, but do not consider their relative submission time. Instead, they split the quantity sold between the buy orders at the same price level i.e., The volume of the shares allocated to each buy order is proportional to the number of available shares currently available at that price. In our previous scenario, with two *buy* orders A (for 200 shares) and B (50 shares) at the same price, an incoming sell order for 200 shares will be matched with 160 shares from A and 40 shares from B (i.e., 80% of each). In other words, if the offer does not suffice to cover the demand, all orders will be filled partially. Besides this basic version of the pro-rata algorithm, there are several other variants with additional constraints such as maximum volume caps and minimum volume thresholds.

# Security Considerations

We now examine market regulations to derive the security properties of modern exchanges and the threat model they operate under. We base our analysis primarily on literature for the US and EU markets, but our modeling remains relevant to exchanges worldwide.

## Security Properties

In 2005, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) consolidated all pre-existing equity market regulations into the Regulation National Market System , aiming to simplify market surveillance and increase investor protection. In the European Union, the "Markets in Financial Instruments Directive" (MiFID II) provides a regulatory framework for investment services . Based on these two regulations, we introduce a list of properties that, we believe, provide a well-rounded definition of fair and transparent markets. Comprehensive overviews of the U.S. Regulatory Landscape can be found in .

-   **Trading Integrity.** All the orders entered by market participants should express honest trading intent, and should not be used to artificially influence the volume of trades, the prices or any other market activity index.

-   **Operational Transparency.** All the details and rules governing the operation of an exchange should be accessible by all market participants.

-   **Fair Market Access.** All market participants should have equal access to the exchange when sending, modifying and canceling orders.

-   **Symmetric Information Access.** All market participants should have equal access to up-to-date data on exchange's order book activity.

-   **Order Queue Integrity.** Orders should be always ranked and executed according to the public order-matching rules of the exchange.

-   **Participant Anonymity.** Non-authorized parties should not have access to the identity of traders using anonymous orders.

-   **Data Confidentiality.** Non-authorized parties should not have access to the pre-trade data of dark orders. In the case of dark pools, other traders should not have access to any information related to a transaction (apart from the buyer and the seller).

The US and European market regulations assume that the majority of traders and exchange operators abide by the regulations, but may occasionally violate one or more of the above properties even if it is explicitly prohibited by the law. Additionally, investors assume that other traders and exchange operators may operate in a legal but unethical manner (e.g., predatory trading).

## Adversarial Model

While in theory all traders have the same access to the market, the complexity of modern exchanges provides various opportunities for gaining competitive edges. We now outline the main characteristics of intelligent traders that make optimal use of their resources without overstepping any legal boundaries :

-   *High Computational Power.* They heavily and continuously invest in computer hardware and software, so as to process market data and execute orders as fast as possible.

-   *Very Low Latency.* They minimize transmission latency by building their own high-bandwidth lines and by housing their computers in the exchange's premises, very close to the matching engine (i.e., colocation). All these can reduce transmission latency to under one millisecond .

-   *Knowledgeable & Strategic.* They have a very good understanding of the exchange's internal processes and systems, and make optimal use of order types to leverage every (intended and unintended) feature they provide.

In finance literature , high-frequency traders are often considered the most sophisticated class of market participants, fitting all the aforementioned characteristics.

# Manipulation Techniques

We now describe several market manipulation techniques that exploit the underlying infrastructure of exchanges and violate one or more of the properties listed in Section .

As part of a complex exploitation strategy, predatory traders often use attacks to: 1) deanonymize investors entering anonymous orders, and 2) uncover large hidden orders.

**Latency Fingerprinting.** This class of deanonymization techniques uses the order-transmission latency as a side-channel to uncover the identity of investors that use anonymous orders (i.e., violates the Participant Anonymity property). The adversary maintains a *latency table* that maps the different brokers/funds to the time it takes for a message to reach the exchange from their network . Upon observing an anonymous order and calculating its inter-arrival time, the adversary uses the latency table to identify the broker that submitted it. From a technical perspective, the transmission latency of an anonymous order is retrieved by subtracting the "submission" timestamp (found in each Financial Information eXchange Protocol message[^3]) from the time the order was listed in the order book of the exchange.

**Pinging.** As outlined in Section , investors placing large orders often elect to use hidden order types to avoid influencing the market price and falling prey to predatory practices. These orders are not displayed in the order book and are matched only if another order at the same price is submitted. Alternatively, investors often break up large buy orders into much smaller ones and enter them gradually into the market . Pinging is one of the techniques used by predatory traders to uncover such investors, and is particularly effective in exchanges that send order execution notifications immediately and market activity updates at regular downsampled intervals. The trader enters several sell orders of the smaller marketable size for the stocks they are interested in monitoring. Once one or more of those orders are matched, the trader is alerted (i.e., pinged) about the presence of a potentially large hidden buy-side order. This technique violates the Data Confidentiality property and is usually combined with other techniques that exploit large buy orders (e.g., scalping).

**Quote stuffing.** This technique is used only by sophisticated traders with direct access to the market (i.e., not through a broker), and involves placing and canceling high volumes of orders. Its objective is to disrupt trading and create arbitrage opportunities by flooding the data feeds of other participants, who are now unable to follow the market (Symmetric Information Access property) . Thus, it exploits bottlenecks in the data processing pipeline of regular investors. In some cases, these attacks may also affect the responsiveness of the matching engine to market participants .

**Sniping.** Sniping  is a form of mechanical arbitrage that relies on high-speed transmission lines and co-location to gain an edge over slower investors. Let a cryptocurrency or security traded on an exchange at price $x$ and a public signal *y* that is strongly correlated to $x$. Consequently, when $y$ increases, traders immediately update their open sell quotes for that security from $x$ to a new increased price $\bar{x}$. However, this process is not instantaneous and hence momentarily (i.e., a few milliseconds) there are open sell quotes at the stale price $x$. Predatory traders with high-speed connections exploit this delay, and submit buy orders at that old price. With non-trivial probability , some of their buy orders get filled at $x$, thus allowing them to immediately sell the security back for $\bar{x}$, risk-free . This practice breaches the Fair Market Access property and has been also observed in dark pools .

**Scalping.** This technique relies on very low-latency network links, violates Fair Market Access property, and is usually combined with market snooping techniques (e.g., pinging to identify large buy orders). Let a broker handling a large buy order for 100,000 shares of company Z. Upon examining the order books of all exchanges, the broker finds 60,000 in exchange $E_1$ and 40,000 shares in exchange $E_2$, both at price x. The broker submits a buy order for 100,000 shares to $E_1$ and gets a partial fill for 60,000 at x. This also triggers a "ping" order set by a predatory trader, informing them that a large order for Z is in the market (see also "Pinging"). Following the order protection rule[^4], $E_1$ now routes the order to exchange $E_2$ to buy the remaining 40,000 shares at price x. However, the predatory trader utilizing its lower network latency, has already executed a buy order in $E_2$ for all available shares of Z at price x. When the broker's buy order for 40,000 share arrives to $E_2$ (a few milliseconds after), the trader matches it with a sell order at a slightly inflated price $\bar{x}$ .

**Queue Jumping.** While initially speed was sufficient for predatory traders to place their orders ahead of other market participants, the influx of technically advanced investors caused this practice to lose its effectiveness. To maintain their edge, predatory traders started using more sophisticated techniques that rely on special (i.e., "exotic") order types, allowing them to jump at the top of the queue[^5], even if their order was not the first to enter the market.

In theory, these order types were accessible to all market participants and thus everyone could bump up the priority of their orders. However, in many cases exchange operators selectively disclosed them only to a subset of their clients and failed to inform everyone else about their existence and operation (Operational Transparency property) . Nevertheless, these order types were exploitable only by sophisticated traders with knowledge of the precedence rules, very low-latency links and high processing power.

*Hide & Light Orders* is one of the most controversial order types. It was introduced as a workaround to Rule 610(d) of Regulation NMS , which prohibits orders that lock[^6] or cross[^7] the National Best Bid and Offer[^8]. To abide by this rule, exchanges temporarily adjust the price of the locking/crossing orders to be a tick (i.e., the minimum price movement) lower/higher than the NBBO, for as long as the market remains locked. Once the market unlocks, the prices are slid back to their original values. However, this does not apply to Hide & Light orders, which retain their original price and are instead switched to being hidden (i.e., non-displayed). Once the market unlocks, they are automatically lighten up again. This seemingly subtle difference corrupted the price-time priority of the queue, as lighten-up orders where placed in front of price-adjusted orders regardless of their relative ranking before the lock.

*Day Intermarket Sweep Orders* is another controversial order type, which is prioritized over all other types, including Hide & Light orders[^9]. Day ISOs are based on a special exception in the Regulation NMS and are executed immediately without verifying if they lock or cross the market (the trader assumes all the regulation compliance liability). While their original motivation was to help institutional investors place large orders without chasing liquidity throughout the market, Day ISOs were quickly proven exploitable by predatory traders. In particular, ISOs were used by sophisticated traders with high-speed market activity feeds to rapidly react to market events, and place themselves ahead of regular investors that: 1) did not use Day ISOs, and 2) relied on the slow Stock Information Provider to find the NBBO.

# Countermeasures

Market regulation is an obvious measure of protection against predatory traders and manipulation practices. Until now, there have been several incidents where market operators and traders were accused of wrongdoing and settled to pay penalties . However, keeping up with the latest manipulation practices, trading styles, market mechanisms, and distinguishing malicious-intent from irrational behavior is far from trivial . For this reason, a small body of work has proposed and, in some cases, deployed technical countermeasures that aim to prevent all or some of these practices. These countermeasures do not seek to replace regulators, but aim to alleviate or at least reduce the opportunities for mechanical arbitrage.

As discussed in Section , many of the manipulation techniques require that the trader can submit, alter and cancel orders within a few milliseconds. For this reason, several exchanges introduced "speed-bumps" that delay the incoming orders and outgoing messages by a predefined amount of time. For example, the Investors Exchange (IEX) and the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) use "speed-bumps" that introduce delay of 350 microseconds  and 1–3 milliseconds respectively . So far, "speed-bumps" have shown promising results in thwarting manipulation techniques that rely on low latency. However, studies are not yet conclusive regarding their effects on the market . Similarly,  introduces an alternative market design that uses discrete time instead of continuous. The authors argue that this design stops the arms race for speed and eliminates the risk-less latency-based arbitrage opportunities. While most of the countermeasures require changes to the market design, there are certain steps that investors can take to protect themselves from specific attacks. For example, "latency tables" (Section ) can be mitigated by adding noise on the timestamp of the submitted instructions.

Due to the above efforts, the rising infrastructure costs and the diminishing returns, high frequency (i.e., very low-latency) trading activity has been steadily declining in the past few years . Simultaneously, markets for other financial assets (e.g., currencies) have seen an increase in low-latency activity  .

# Conclusions & Future Work

This work aims to shed light on the technical aspects of market manipulation and to highlight the relevance of security analysis techniques and secure engineering principles to that problem. Toward this goal, we introduced a set of basic fairness properties, and used them to examine different market manipulation techniques and their mitigation counterparts. It is our hope that this new research direction will complement the legislative efforts for fair and transparent markets. While we focused on stock exchanges, future research could also investigate the risks that the average investor faces in unregulated cryptocurrency exchanges and decentralized trading platforms.

[^1]: In practice, order routing is more complex, and optimal execution in a volatile market is non-trivial .

[^2]: The Stock Information Provider is a central, consolidated stream and aggregator displaying the best priced bid and ask quotes, and the trading activity of each exchange.

[^3]: <http://www.fixprotocol.org/>

[^4]: The Order Protection Rule of Regulation NMS (Rule 611) introduced the National Best Bid and Offer requirement that protects investors from receiving sub-optimal prices for their quotes. In particular, Rule 611 mandates that exchanges should either reject marketable orders or route them to the exchange with the best price.

[^5]: Orders that are closer to the top of the order book have access to more liquidity and better prices .

[^6]: A buy order at price $x$ in an exchange $E_1$ locks the market, if there is another sell order for the same price $x$ in another exchange $E_2$ .

[^7]: A market is crossed if a buy order is posted at a price that is higher than the best (lowest) existing sell order, or inversely if a sell order is posted at a price lower than the best (highest) bid

[^8]: The NBBO index is updated throughout the day with the lowest selling price and the highest buying bid (from all US exchanges) in order to ensure that investors receive the best possible price

[^9]: This prioritization rule concerns only the first Day ISO to enter the market and every subsequent Day ISO receives standard arrival time priority .