arXiv:cs/0509017v1 [cs.MA] 6 Sep 2005

Traders imprint themselves by adaptively updating
their own avatar
Gilles Daniel1 , Lev Muchnik2, and Sorin Solomon3
1

2

3

School of Computer Science, University of Manchester, UK
gilles@cs.man.ac.uk
Department of Physics, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
LevMuchnik@gmail.com
Racah Institute of Physics, Hebrew University of Jerusalem and
Lagrange Laboratory for Excellence in Complexity, ISI Foundation, Torino
sorin@cc.huji.ac.il

Simulations of artificial stock markets were considered as early as 1964 [Sti64] and
multi-agent ones were introduced as early as 1989 [KM89]. Starting the early 90’s
[PAH+ 94, LLS00, Ter00], collaborations of economists and physicists produced increasingly realistic simulation platforms. Currently, the market stylized facts are
easily reproduced and one has now to address the realistic details of the Market
Microstructure and of the Traders Behaviour. This calls for new methods and tools
capable of bridging smoothly between simulations and experiments in economics.
We propose here the following Avatar-Based Method (ABM). The subjects implement and maintain their Avatars (programs encoding their personal decision making procedures) on NatLab, a market simulation platform. Once these procedures
are fed in a computer edible format, they can be operationally used as such without
the need for belabouring, interpreting or conceptualising them. Thus ABM shortcircuits the usual behavioural economics experiments that search for the psychological mechanisms underlying the subjects behaviour. Finally, ABM maintains a level of
objectivity close to the classical behaviourism while extending its scope to subjects’
decision making mechanisms.
We report on experiments where Avatars designed and maintained by humans
from different backgrounds (including real traders) compete in a continuous doubleauction market. Instead of viewing this as a collectively authored computer simulation, we consider it rather as a new type of computer aided experiment. Indeed we
consider the Avatars as a medium on which the subjects can imprint and refine interactively representations of their internal decision making processes. Avatars can be
objectively validated (as carriers of a faithful replica of the subject decision making
process) by comparing their actions with the ones that the subjects would take in similar situations. We hope this unbiased way of capturing the adaptive evolution of real
subjects behaviour may lead to a new kind of behavioural economics experiments
with a high degree of reliability, analysability and reproducibility.

2

Gilles Daniel, Lev Muchnik, and Sorin Solomon

1 Introduction
In the last decade, generic stylized facts were reproduced with very simple agents
by a wide range of models [BPS97, LGC+ 99, LM99, CB00, MSS03, GB03]. By the
very nature of their generic properties, those models teach us little on real particular
effects taking place as result of real particular conditions within the market. In order
to understand such specific market phenomena, one may need to go beyond ”simplestupid” traders behaviour [Axe97]. Thus the task of the present generation of models
is to describe and explain the observed collective market phenomena in terms of the
actual behaviour of the individuals.
For a long while, classical economics assumed individuals were homogeneous
and behaved rationally. Thus it was not necessary to study real people behaviour
since (presumably) there is only one way to be rational. Even after the conditions of
rationality and homogeneity were relaxed, many models did it by postulating arbitrary departures not necessarily based on actual experiments. When the connection
to the real subjects behaviour was considered [KT79], an entire host of puzzles and
paradoxes appeared even in the simplest artificial (laboratory) conditions. Thus the
inclusion of real trader behaviour in the next generation of models and simulations is
hampered by the inexistence of comprehensive, systematic, reliable data. Given the
present state of the art in psychological experiments, where even the behaviour of
single subjects is difficult to assess, we are lead to look for alternative ways to elicit
the necessary input for agent-based market modelling.
In this paper we propose a way out of this impasse. Rather than considering the
computer as a passive receiver of the behavioural information elicited by psychological experiments, we use the computer itself as an instrument to extract some of the
missing information. More precisely, we ask the subjects to write and update adaptively, between simulation runs (or virtual trading sessions) their own avatars. By
gradual corrections, those avatars converge to satisfactory representations of the subjects’ behaviour, in situations created by their own collective co-evolution. The fact
that the co-evolution takes place through the intermediary of the avatars interaction
provides an objective detailed documentation of the process.
More important, the dialogue with the avatars, their actions and their collective
consequences assist the subjects in expressing in a more and more precise way their
take on the evolving situation and validate the avatar as an expression of the subject
internal decision mechanisms. Ultimately, the avatar becomes the objective repository of the subject decision making process. Thus we extend, with the help of computers, the behaviorist realm of objectivity to a new area of decision making dynamics. The classical behaviourism limits legitimate research access to external overt
behaviour, restraining its scope to the external effects produced by a putative mental dynamics. The method above enables us to study the subjects decision making
dynamics without relying on ambiguous records of overt subjects behaviour nor on
subjective introspective records of their mental state and motivations.
Far from invalidating the psychological experimental framework, the present
method offers psychological experiments a wide new source of information in probing humans mind. The competitive ego-engaging character of the realistic NatLab

Traders imprint themselves by adaptively updating their own avatar

3

market platform [Muc] puts humans in very interesting, authentic and revealing situations in a well controlled and documented environment. Thus standard psychological techniques can exploit it e.g. by interviewing the subjects before and after their
updated strategies are applied and succeed (or fail!).

2 Avatars
The program sketched in the previous section suggests a Behavioural Finance viewpoint, in a realistic simulation framework. More precisely, the avatars acting in such
an environment are able to elicit from the subjects operationally precise and arbitrarily refined descriptions of their decision processes. In particular, by analysing the
successive avatar versions that passed the validation of its owner, one can learn how
the owner behaves in this market environment, how (s)he designs his/her strategies,
how (s)he decides to depart from them, how (s)he updates them iteratively, etc. Thus
the new environment acquires a mixed computational and experimental laboratory
character. In this respect, the present study owes to previous research that involved
simulations / experiments combining human beings and artificial agents, in real-time
[Cap05] or off-line [MS03, BPBK04] – see [Duf04] for a review of computational
vs experimental laboratories.
The heart of the new simulation-experimentation platform is the co-evolving set
of Avatars. They constitute both the interacting actors and the medium for recording
the chronicles of the emergent collective dynamics of the subjects. As a medium for
capturing cognitive behaviour, the avatars help extend the behaviorist objectivity criteria to processes that until now would be considered as off-limits. We are achieving
it by trying to elicit from humans operational instructions for reaching decisions that
they want implemented by their market representatives - the avatars. There is an important twist in this procedure: we are not trying to obtain from the subjects reports
of their internal state of mind and its evolution; we are just eliciting instructions for
objective actions in specific circumstances. They are however formulated in terms
of conditional clauses that capture users intentionality, evaluations, preferences and
internal logics.
2.1 Principle
At the beginning of a run, every participant designs his own avatar which is used as a
basis to generate an entire family of artificial agents whose individuality is expressed
by various (may be stochastically generated) values of their parameters. The resulting
set of artificial agents compete against each other in our market environment; see Fig.
1. We use many instances, rather than a single instance of the avatar for each subject,
for the following reasons:
•
•

having a realistic number of traders that carry a certain strategy, trading policy or
behaviour profile
having enough statistics on the performance of each avatar and information on
the actual distribution of this performance

4

Gilles Daniel, Lev Muchnik, and Sorin Solomon

Fig. 1. The Avatar-Based Method: Human subjects design their avatar in the NatLab environment. From each avatar, a family of artificial agents is generated and included in the market.

Once the population of agents is generated, a first simulation run is performed.
A typical run lasts about 10 minutes of CPU , which may represent years of trading on the artificial time scale. At the end of each run, the results are processed and
presented to the participants. In our experiments until now, both private and public
information were made available. In particular, the price (and volume) trajectory,
the (relative) individuals wealth in terms of cash holdings, stock holdings, and their
evolution were publicly displayed. The avatar codes were also disclosed and the participants were asked to describe publicly their strategy and the design of their avatar.
After being presented with the results (whether full or only public information) of
the previous run, the participants are allowed to modify their own avatar and submit
an upgraded version for the next run, as described in Fig. 2.
The goal of this iterative process, co-evolving subjects thinking with computer
simulations, is to converge in two respects; the subject understands better and better:
•
•

the consequences of his/her own strategy
how to get the avatars to execute it faithfully

2.2 Comparison between approaches
In this section, we discuss the relevance of our method in the context of other works
in economics. The economics field spans a wide range of fields and approaches. In
the table displayed in Fig. 3, the four rows classify the activities in terms of their context and environment, starting with the DESK at the bottom of the table, extending it
to the use of computers, then to the laboratory and ultimately to the real unstructured
world.

Traders imprint themselves by adaptively updating their own avatar

5

Fig. 2. Iterative process: participants design and improve their avatar in between every simulation run

CLASSICAL METHODS
Wide
Wild
World

Field Studies
Econometrics
Behavioral Economics
WWW based large scale
experiments

AVATAR-BASED METHOD
Remote extraction of avatars
from special distant subjects:
Important bank executives,
nationals of various cultures etc.

Interactive subjects experiments
LAB

Single Subject cognitive
experiments

Agent-Based and
Social Networks Simulations
COMPUTER Computational finance

Intimate dialogue between
Subjects and Computer via
Avatar Update alternated with
NatLab Market Runs Validation

Numerical Model Solving
Game Theory and other
Analytical work
DESK
Economic Analysis

Relaxing in a controlled way
the assumptions of the
models.
Expressing operationally
qualitative descriptions.

Fig. 3. Positioning the Avatar-Based Method

6

Gilles Daniel, Lev Muchnik, and Sorin Solomon

The two columns of the table refere to the usual methods and the ”Avatar-Based
Method” (ABM from now on). One sees that in our view, the ABM constitutes a
rather uniform way to treat economic behaviour and is capable of bridging application areas that were until now disjoint. This is clearly the case for the LAB and
COMPUTER rows, where we even erased the separation line, but it has implications
for the other rows too. For instance the Avatars, and especially within the NatLab
environment, have been used already to extend to more realistic conditions some
theoretical models (row 4 of the table) and results [MSS03].
At the other extreme (rows 1-2 in the table), the Avatar-Based Method can help
correct a perennial problem of economic studies: the biased and sometimes unrepresentative profile of the involved subjects. Indeed, it is very difficult to involve in
those studies decision making officials from financial institutions or traders. Substituting them by BA Undergrads is hardly a step towards realistic emulation of the
real world. It is much more likely that these important players, rather than coming
to a lab, will agree to provide the elements for creating their Avatars. Similar problems can be solved by including in the ABM experiments subjects from far away
cultures or environments, without the necessity for distant travels and without separating them from their usual motivations and environment. Moreover, the information
provided once by such subjects that are difficult to access can be used now repeatedly
by playing their Avatars. Thus ABM has a good chance to bridge the gap between
field studies and lab experiments too (rows 1-2 in the table). In fact as opposed to
experiments that do not involve a market mechanism with capital gain and loss, in
NatLab, incompetent non-representative subjects will naturally be eliminated since
their Avatars loose very quickly their capital.
Another point on which the ABM procedures are offering new hope is the well
known problem of subjects motivation. Within the usual experimental frameworks,
it is very difficult to motivate subjects, especially competent important people. From
our experience, the NatLab realistic framework and the direct identification of the
subjects with their Avatars successes and failures, lead to a very intensive and enthusiastic participation of the subjects even for experiments that last for a few days.
In fact, beyond the question of ”prestige”, even seasoned professionals reported to
have gained new insights in their own thinking during the sessions. Another promise
that ABM is yet to deliver is that by isolating and documenting the Avatar update at
discrete times, one will be able to contribute to neighbouring cognitive fields such as
learning.

3 Method Validation
A piece of software is not an experimental set-up. With all its power, the value of
the platform and of the ”Avatar-Based Experiments” method has to be realized in
real life and an elaborate technical and procedural set-up has to be created. The basic condition for the very applicability of our method is the humans capability to
faithfully, precisely and consistently express their decision making in terms of computer feedable procedures. Thus we concentrated our first validation efforts in this

Traders imprint themselves by adaptively updating their own avatar

7

direction, adapting platform and procedural features to accommodate humans. Many
other experimental aspects have to be standardised and calibrated, but in those experiments we concentrated on this crucial sine qua non issue. We can conclude at
this stage that while there are humans (even economist professionals and successful
traders) that could not express their ”system” in a computer feedable format (”buy
low , sell high”), by-and-large the participants in our experiments were able to confirm at some point that their avatar behaved in agreement with their own behaviour.
This happened even with subjects with no particular computer (or market) skills.
3.1 Experimental setup
Our experiment features a continuous double-auction implemented on the NatLab
simulation platform. Every participant received extensive support from a computer
scientist to implement his/her avatar in C++ on the platform.
NatLab platform
The NatLab has the capability to simulate in great detail the continuum time asynchronous real world [MS03]. Bilateral and multilateral communication between
agents outside and in parallel with the market is made possible by NatLab. However, given that this experiment focuses mainly on the participants behaviour, we
kept the market mechanism (the rules of the game) as simple as possible, while retaining the concept of continuous double-auction, essential to understand the price
formation dynamics. NatLab was initially engineered as a simulation platform but its
use is now in three distinct directions:
1. the platform provides a realistic framework for the individuals to act within. Providing this ”reality” is independent of whether one is interested in its characteristics; it just allows an interactive continuous extraction of information from each
of the participants and thereby refining our understanding on their approach,
reactions and decision mechanisms;
2. the platform is part of a recent wide effort to understand the emergence of collective complex dynamics out of interacting agents with well defined, relatively
simple individual behaviour; and
3. the platform, due to its realistic features and its asynchronous continuous time
microstructure, is a reliable way to reproduce and maybe in the future predict
real market behaviour.
Market microstructure
Our market implements a continuous double-auction mechanism, where agents can
submit, asynchronously and at any time, limit or market orders to a single public
book. Orders are sorted by price and then by time, as on the NYSE for instance.
Every agent acts as a simple trader, and we do not include brokers or market makers
at this stage. In this simple setup, agents balance their portfolio between a risky asset
(a stock distributing or not a dividend) and a riskless one (a bond yielding or not an
interest rate). Agents can communicate with each other through pairwise messages,
and react to external news according to an idiosyncratic sensibility.

8

Gilles Daniel, Lev Muchnik, and Sorin Solomon

Avatars
We organise our experiment as a competition between participants through the intermediary of their avatars. Avatars generate, by assigning values to their parameters,
families of agents that act as independent (but possibly interacting) individuals in the
market. The subjects’ aim in each run is to generate a family of artificial agents that
perform well against other families throughout the simulation run. A typical simulation run is exhibited in Fig. 4. Families were compared by their average wealth, but
an average utility (given some utility function) or a certain bonus for minimising risk
could be used in the future.
We give our participants total liberty while implementing their avatar. They can
define their own time horizon and design trading strategies as simple or complex as
needed, but in the future we may tax agents with heavy data processing by imposing
a fine or a specific time lag in the order execution.
3.2 Preliminary results
We have run two sets of experiments so far, with different participants including practitioners (real traders) and academics, either economists, physicists, psychologists or
computer scientists. Each experiment included seven participants. The first experiment took place on July 19-31 2004, in Lyon, during the SCSHS Summer School on
Models for Complex Systems in Human and Social Sciences organised by the Ecole
Normale Suprieure de Lyon. The second was organised on January 12-16, in Turin,
during the Winter Seminar on Agent-based Models of Financial Markets organised
by the ISI Foundation. A typical run, with a preliminary analysis of the price time
series and relative evolution of populations, is presented on Fig. 4. We report here on
some of the non trivial aspects of the participants behaviour during the experiments,
while creating and updating their avatars.
Imprinting oneself
We noticed, specially at the beginning of the process, that some of our participants
encountered some difficulties to express themselves in terms of computer feedable
strategies. However, this improved dramatically during the iterative process itself.
This is clearly linked to the learning process that one has to face while performing
any experiment, especially computerised ones.
Conscious / Unconscious decisions
The very nature of our method barely allows such things as intuition, improvisation
or unconscious decisions to be operationally expressed in the avatar. In fact, after
a few runs, avatars capture exclusively the conscious part of our subjects decision
making process. Since we we do not know to what extent markets dynamics are
driven by unconscious choices, it would be interesting to design a double experiment,
comparing subjects and their own avatar in the same market microstructure.

Traders imprint themselves by adaptively updating their own avatar

9

1

0.16

a

Data
Gaussian

b

Returns
Volatility

Probability

0.12

ACF

0.08

0.04

0.00
0
-0.04

Time (au)

-0.03

-0.01

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

d

c
0.170

Relative Wealth

14

Price

-0.02

Log Return

0.172

12

0.168

0.166

0.164

0.162

10

Time (au)

Time (au)

e

f
1200

120

Cash

Stocks

1000

100

800

600

80

Time (au)

Time (au)

Fig. 4. Typical run with 7 avatars, 1000 agents each, for above 350 000 transaction ticks. (a)
Autocorrelation functions – absence of raw returns autocorrelation and long-term autocorrelation of volatility, as defined as absolute returns, as observed in empirical data [LGC+ 99];(b)
Normality Plot – fat tailed distribution of returns; (c) Price trajectory; (d) Relative wealth of
agents populations – measure the relative success of competing avatars; (e) Stock holdings –
some strategies are clearly buy-and-hold, others interact with each other; and (f) Cash holdings

Convergence
There are two different but related convergence processes that took place during the
successive iterations: the first was the convergence of the avatar’s behaviour to its
creator’s intended strategy, while the second involved the evolution of subjects strategy itself to beat other participants. While it appeared relatively easy after a couple
of runs to get an avatar successfully reproducing their initial intended behaviour,
subjects, driven by competition, kept refining and complexifying their strategy.

10

Gilles Daniel, Lev Muchnik, and Sorin Solomon

Strategies
An interesting panel of strategies was proposed and grown by the participants, that
could loosely be termed random trader, momentum trader, oscillatory trader, diversified Bollinger Bands trader, volume seeker, Neural Network based trader and evolutionary trader. Practitioners clearly outmarked themselves by their ability to think
out of the box, the creativity of their strategies, their high analysis power and ability
to quickly understand what was going on and spot opportunities to arbitrage other
participants’ strategies. We also observed the emergence of cooperation between participants to hunt for the leader, trying to bring down the winning strategy by copying
and modifying it or even custom-designing new strategies for this specific purpose.
Fundamental Value
In the two experiments we ran, our computer simulation figured a closed artificial
market, with no creation of stocks, no distribution of dividends and no interest rate
associated with the riskless asset, cash. In those conditions, we observed that after a
transition period, characterised by high volumes, during which assets were heavily
reallocated between agents, the price kept fluctuating around a steady state equilibrium price. This price, emerging from the interactions between heterogeneous,
relative risk aversion agents, was generally different from the fundamental value we
could have expected from rational agents with homogeneous preferences.

4 Conclusion
The rapidly growing field of Agent-based Computational Finance comes naturally
as a complementary approach to the other Finance subfields: Behavioural Finance,
Laboratory experiments, Econometrics, Game Theory, etc. The field is definitely out
of his infancy and a rather wide range of choices is available to academics and practitioners that wish to define and test concrete real and realistic systems or new models of individual and market behaviour. The next step is to set common standards
for the platforms that propose to represent and simulate artificial financial markets
[JLM04, Cap03, SMLS00, BPBK04]. One possible goal is to transform them in virtual or even real laboratories capable to implement and test in realistic conditions
arbitrarily sophisticated experiments. One way to solve the problems of realistic
trader behaviour is the Avatar-Based Method introduced in the present paper. Even
though there are many obstacles not even yet uncovered in realizing its ambitions, the
method is already providing new insight and definitely even if its main ambitions are
going to remain unfulfilled, it is guaranteed to provide fresh unexpected and valuable
material to the existing methods.
Among the fundamental issues which the ABM can address is the mystery of
price formation by providing in great detail, reliability and reproducibility, the traders
decision making mechanisms. Occasionally the Avatars are going to be caught unprepared and inadequate to deal with some instances that were not previewed by their

Traders imprint themselves by adaptively updating their own avatar

11

owners. By the virtue of this very instance, they will become effective labels for the
emergence of novelty in the market. Thus in such instances, even in its failure, the
ABM will provide precious behavioural and conceptual information.
ABM can serve as a design tool for practitioners in the development of new
trading strategies and the design of trading automata. Moreover, we hope that this
approach will provide new ways to address some of the fundamental problems underlying the economics field:
•
•
•

how people depart from rationality
how out-of-equilibrium markets achieve or not efficiency
how extreme events due to a shifting composition of markets participants could
be anticipated

The experiments we ran, beyond eliciting information, provided a very special
and novel framework of interaction between practitioners and academics. Thus NatLab and ABM might have an impact on the community by providing a common
language and vocabulary to bring together academics and much needed practitioners. As a consequence, it appears necessary to gather interdisciplinary projects that
would house within the same team the psychologists that run experiments on people’s behaviour, computer scientists that canonise this behaviour into artificial agents,
practitioners that relate those experiments to real markets and economists that assess
the consequences in terms of policy making.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the participants of our experiments for their time and commitment, together with the participants of the Seminar on (Un)Realistic Simulations
of Financial Markets at ISI Foundation, Turin, Italy, on April 1-5 2005, for their
enlightening comments, from which this paper largely benefitted. Finally, we are
largely indebted to Alessandro Cappellini and Pietro Terna for their views and experience on online laboratory experiments of stock markets, as well as Martin Hosnisch, Diana Mangalagiu and Tom Erez. The research of SS was supported in part
by a grant from the Israeli Academy of Science, and the research of LM was supported by a grant from the Centre for Complexity Science. All errors are our own
responsibilities.

References
[Axe97]

R. Axelrod. The Complexity of Cooperation: AgentBased Models of Competition
and Collaboration. Princeton University Press, 1997.
[BPBK04] K. Boer, M. Polman, A. Bruin, and U. Kaymak. An agent-based framework for
artificial stock markets. In 16th Belgian-Dutch Conference on Artificial Intelligence
(BNAIC), 2004.
[BPS97] P. Bak, M. Paczuski, and M. Shubik. Price variations in a stock market with many
agents. Physica A, 246:430–453, 1997.

12
[Cap03]

Gilles Daniel, Lev Muchnik, and Sorin Solomon

A. N. Cappellini. Esperimenti su mercati finanziari con agenti naturali ed artificiali. Master’s thesis, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Finanziarie, Facolta
di Economia, Universita di Torino, Italy, 2003.
[Cap05] A. Cappellini. Avatar e simulazioni. Sistemi intelligenti, 1:45–58, 2005.
[CB00] R. Cont and J.-P. Bouchaud. Herd behaviour and aggregate fluctuations in financial
markets. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 4:170–196, 2000.
[Duf04] J. Duffy. Agent-based models and human subject experiments. Computational
Economics 0412001, Economics Working Paper Archive at WUSTL, December
2004. available at http://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpco/0412001.html.
[GB03] I. Giardina and J.-P. Bouchaud. Bubbles, crashes and intermittency in agent based
market models. The European Physical Journal B, 31:421–537, 2003.
[JLM04] B. I. Jacobs, K. N. Levy, and H. Markowitz. Financial market simulations. Journal
of Portfolio Management, 30th Anniversary, 2004.
[KM89] G. Kim and H. Markowitz. Investment rules, margin, and market volatility. Journal
of Portfolio Management, 16(1):45–52, 1989.
[KT79] D. Kahneman and A. Tversky. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk.
Econometrica, 47(2):263–292, 1979.
[LGC+ 99] Y Liu, P. Gopikrishnan, P. Cizeau, M. Meyer, C. Peng, and H. E. Stanley. Statistical properties of the volatility of price fluctuations. Physical Review E, 60:1390–
1400, 1999.
[LLS00] H. Levy, M. Levy, and S. Solomon. Microscopic Simulation of Financial Markets:
From Investor Behavior to Market Phenomena. Berkeley, CA: Academic Press,
2000.
[LM99] T. Lux and M. Marchesi. Scaling and criticality in a stochastic multi-agent model
of a financial market. Nature, 397:498–500, 1999.
[MS03] L. Muchnik and S. Solomon. Statistical mechanics of conventional traders may
lead to non-conventional market behavior. Physica Scripta, T106:41–47, 2003.
[MSS03] L. Muchnik, F. Slanina, and S. Solomon. The interacting gaps model: reconciling
theoretical and numerical approaches to limit-order models. Physica A, 330:232–
239, 2003.
[Muc]
Lev Muchnik. Simulating emergence of complex collective dynamics in the stock
markets.
http://shum.huji.ac.il/˜sorin/ccs/Lev-Thesis.pdf.
[PAH+ 94] R. G. Palmer, W. B. Arthur, J. H. Holland, B. LeBaron, and P. Tayler. Artificial
economic life: a simple model of a stock market. Physica D, 75:264–274, 1994.
[SMLS00] M. Shatner, L. Muchnik, M. Leshno, and S. Solomon. A continuous time asynchronous model of the stock market; beyond the lls model. In Economic Dynamics
from the Physics Point of View. Physikzentrum Bad Honnef, Germany, 2000.
[Sti64]
G. J. Stigler. Public regulation of the securities market. Journal of Business,
37(2):117–142, 1964.
[Ter00] P. Terna. Sum: A surprising (un)realistic market - building a simple stock market structure with swarm. In Computing in Economics and Finance. Society for
Computational Economics, 2000.

