Deviations from the Nash equilibrium and emergence of tacit collusion in a two-player optimal execution game with reinforcement learning

Fabrizio Lillo, Andrea Macrì
{"title":"Deviations from the Nash equilibrium and emergence of tacit collusion in a two-player optimal execution game with reinforcement learning","authors":"Fabrizio Lillo, Andrea Macrì","doi":"arxiv-2408.11773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of reinforcement learning algorithms in financial trading is becoming\nincreasingly prevalent. However, the autonomous nature of these algorithms can\nlead to unexpected outcomes that deviate from traditional game-theoretical\npredictions and may even destabilize markets. In this study, we examine a\nscenario in which two autonomous agents, modeled with Double Deep Q-Learning,\nlearn to liquidate the same asset optimally in the presence of market impact,\nusing the Almgren-Chriss (2000) framework. Our results show that the strategies\nlearned by the agents deviate significantly from the Nash equilibrium of the\ncorresponding market impact game. Notably, the learned strategies exhibit tacit\ncollusion, closely aligning with the Pareto-optimal solution. We further\nexplore how different levels of market volatility influence the agents'\nperformance and the equilibria they discover, including scenarios where\nvolatility differs between the training and testing phases.","PeriodicalId":501273,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - ECON - General Economics","volume":"143 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - ECON - General Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.11773","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of reinforcement learning algorithms in financial trading is becoming increasingly prevalent. However, the autonomous nature of these algorithms can lead to unexpected outcomes that deviate from traditional game-theoretical predictions and may even destabilize markets. In this study, we examine a scenario in which two autonomous agents, modeled with Double Deep Q-Learning, learn to liquidate the same asset optimally in the presence of market impact, using the Almgren-Chriss (2000) framework. Our results show that the strategies learned by the agents deviate significantly from the Nash equilibrium of the corresponding market impact game. Notably, the learned strategies exhibit tacit collusion, closely aligning with the Pareto-optimal solution. We further explore how different levels of market volatility influence the agents' performance and the equilibria they discover, including scenarios where volatility differs between the training and testing phases.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
具有强化学习功能的双人最佳执行博弈中的纳什均衡偏离和默契串通的出现
强化学习算法在金融交易中的应用越来越普遍。然而,这些算法的自主性可能会导致意想不到的结果,偏离传统博弈论的预测,甚至可能破坏市场稳定。在本研究中,我们利用 Almgren-Chriss(2000 年)框架,研究了两个自主代理在双深度 Q 学习模型下学习如何在市场影响下以最优方式清算同一资产的情景。我们的结果表明,代理学习的策略严重偏离了相应市场影响博弈的纳什均衡。值得注意的是,学习到的策略表现出默契,与帕累托最优解非常接近。我们还进一步探讨了不同水平的市场波动如何影响代理的表现及其发现的均衡,包括在训练和测试阶段波动不同的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
It depends: Varieties of defining growth dependence Experimental Evidence That Conversational Artificial Intelligence Can Steer Consumer Behavior Without Detection Cognitive Hierarchy in Day-to-day Network Flow Dynamics The long-term human capital and health impacts of a pollution reduction programme What Does ChatGPT Make of Historical Stock Returns? Extrapolation and Miscalibration in LLM Stock Return Forecasts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1