1:
2: \documentclass[onecolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
3:
4: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
5: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
6: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
7:
8:
9:
10: \begin{document}
11:
12: \title{Clustering Evolutionary Stock Market Model}
13: \author{Jie Wang}
14: \author{Chun-Xia Yang}
15: \author{Pei-Ling Zhou}
16: \affiliation{
17: Department of Electronic Science and Technology,\\
18: University of Science and Technology of China,\\
19: Hefei, Anhui, 230026, PR China}
20: \author{Ying-Di Jin}
21: \author{Tao Zhou}
22: \author{Bing-Hong Wang}
23: \email{bhwang@ustc.edu.cn,Fax:+86-551-3603574}
24: \affiliation{
25: Department of Modern Physics,\\
26: University of Science and Technology of China,\\
27: Hefei, Anhui, 230026, PR China }
28:
29: \date{\today}
30:
31: \begin{abstract}
32:
33: As a typical representation of complex networks studied relatively
34: thoroughly, financial market presents some special details, such
35: as its nonconservation and opinions spreading. In this model,
36: agents congregate to form some clusters, which may grow or
37: collapse with the evolution of the system. To mimic an open
38: market, we allow some ones participate in or exit the market
39: suggesting that the number of the agents would fluctuate.
40: Simulation results show that the large events are frequent in the
41: fluctuations of the stock price generated by the artificial stock
42: market when compared with a normal process and the price return
43: distribution is a \emph{l\'{e}vy} distribution in the central part
44: followed by an approximately exponential truncation.
45: \end{abstract}
46:
47: \pacs{87.23.Ge,02.50.Le,05.45.Tp,05.65.+b}
48:
49: \maketitle
50:
51: \section{Introduction}
52: As the research of the complex systems is getting deeper and
53: deeper, to find the universal rules and principles of these
54: systems and to answer the origination of ``complexity" become more
55: and more attractive \cite{53,54,55,56,57,58}. Thus, the vision of
56: physicists is no longer restricted in the traditional areas but
57: concentrates on the more comprehensive domains, leading to the
58: birth of many burgeoning disciplines through the interaction and
59: amalgamation of physics and other fields such as biology, finance,
60: sociology, and so on. Over the last decade, there has been
61: significant interest in applying physical methods in social and
62: economical science \cite{37}. In particular, the study of
63: financial market prices has been found to exhibit some universal
64: properties similar to those observed in physical systems with a
65: large number of interacting units, and some models
66: \cite{41,42,43,44,45} (as we know, the first stock market
67: simulation was performed by economist Stigler in 1964 \cite{46})
68: have been introduced to the financial and more recently to the
69: physical communities which attempt to capture the complex
70: behaviors of stock market prices and market agents \cite{47}.
71: These models, including behavior-mind model \cite{16,17},
72: dynamic-games model \cite{32},
73: multi-agent model \cite{18,19,20,21,22,3} and so on, are based on the statistical properties \cite{23}
74: of price fluctuations which should be recovered by more suitable microscopic models \cite{24}:
75: (1)sharp peak and fat-tail distribution for the price changes (the return histogram) \cite{25};
76: (2)the distribution of returns decays with power law in
77: the tails \cite{28}, with exponent near 3; (3)price fluctuations are
78: not invariant against time reversal, i.e. they show a forward-backward
79: asymmetry \cite{30}.
80:
81:
82:
83: Among the more sophisticated approaches are dynamic
84: multi-agent models
85: based on the interactions of two distinct agent
86: populations (``noisy" and ``fundamental" traders), which could simulate the
87: price forming processes and reproduce some of the stylized observations of
88: real markets, but fail to account for the origin of the universal
89: characteristics. An alternative approach, the herd behavior \cite{48,49} explored in this
90: paper, may be capable to induce
91: the power-law asymptotic behavior in the tail of price return
92: distribution with an exponent well fitting the truncated L\'{e}vy regime \cite{25}
93: as found in real data \cite{44,28}. This approach has been
94: formalized by Cont and Bouchaud \cite{31} as a static
95: percolation model. Subsequently, this percolation model has been
96: bettered by introducing a feedback mechanism between the price return $Z$ and trader activity
97: $a$: $a \rightarrow a+\alpha Z$, where $\alpha$ is the factor
98: denoting the sensitivity to price fluctuations. Then the
99: volatility clustering can be reproduced, and all of the statistical properties of fluctuations for prices
100: mentioned above could be observed.
101:
102:
103:
104:
105: \par In the Cont-Bonchaud model, random percolation clusters are used as groups
106: of traders. In the simple version, at each iteration each cluster buys with probability
107: $a$, sells with probability $a$ or sleeps with probability $1-2a$. When
108: the activity $a$ is small, there are only few clusters trading at a time
109: most of the times. Therefore, the distribution $P_{b}(Z)$ of relative price
110: fluctuations or ``returns" $Z$ scales as the
111: well-known \cite{38,39,40} cluster size distribution of percolation theory. But when we increase the value of $a$
112: , more and more clusters would make contribution to the relative
113: price fluctuations and the central limit theorem suggests that
114: the distribution $P_{b}(Z)$ convert from power-law tails to a
115: more Gaussian shape for large systems. Price changes in the
116: logarithm (return) are proportional to the difference between
117: the
118: supply and demand. On average, price rises or falls with equal probability and without
119: correlations between consecutive steps. An assumption made in
120: this model which should not be ignored is that the
121: probability $a$ (activity) is set to be the same for all
122: groups and remains constant through out the whole process, which may be a good strategy for simplifying a
123: physical model but may be not a good regulation for
124: establishing a model which we expect to reflect the various
125: phenomena found in the real stock market as genuine as possible
126: so it could be more helpful for us to capture the complex
127: properties
128: of the real world. Although in the successional studies of the
129: percolation model different mechanisms are used to
130: establish a self-organized model where the investor groups
131: with various trading activities and sizes are formed
132: automatically, few of these models considered the fluctuations of
133: the traders in the market, fact that there are always agents
134: who
135: take part in or exit from the market due to various reasons which
136: might have a serious influence on the price. Here we introduce
137: a self-organized model where the activities and sizes of different investor groups are
138: driven by the confliction and harmonization of the strategies
139: adopted by different groups. The simulation results which well agree with
140: the observations of real markets are also shown in the third section.
141:
142: \begin{figure}
143: \scalebox{0.37}[0.42]{\includegraphics{fig3a1}}
144: \scalebox{0.425}[0.425]{\includegraphics{fig1b1}} \caption{(a)To
145: illustrate, this is a small-scale matrix comparing to our model
146: which can help us to explain what is a cluster called in this
147: paper. A cluster, here we call it $M$, is defined as an
148: aggregation of nodes that share the same information and hold the
149: same opinion. Moreover, in the topology, every two nodes in $M$
150: can reach each other. Obviously, there are two different clusters
151: which are represented by different colors, yellow and blue in
152: figure 1(a). In the process of growth, each cluster has distinct
153: probability to absorb new members who could occupy the frontier
154: and empty nodes with different probabilities determined by the
155: cluster which they would participate in. And the sites which the
156: new agents could occupy are denoted by the hollow nodes. But the
157: colors of the hollow nodes are distinguished which implies that
158: there must be some difference between the positions marked by
159: different colors. In fact, the positions denoted by red hollow
160: nodes mean that if a new member comes into the market and takes up
161: one of these positions, he would be puzzled for there are two
162: different attitudes. In other words, he comes across two different
163: information resources which would lead to completely different
164: consequences. And he operates just like a information bridge which
165: would stimulate the communication of clusters holding different
166: attitudes and even lead to a serious confliction that could
167: promote some certain clusters to merge others and expand to a
168: giant one such as the cluster shown in figure 1(b). The opposite
169: process called "collapse of the cluster" in this model, which
170: means that the nodes belonging to a same cluster are removed from
171: the lattice, reflects another phenomenon of the real market that
172: there are always some traders quitting the market due to different
173: reasons which may lead to a serious influence on the price.}
174: \end{figure}
175:
176:
177: \section{The new model}
178: \par Considering an open market which absorbs and removes traders with
179: probabilities respectively in the process of trading, we draw the growth and
180: collapse of clusters
181: into our model based on Cont-Bouchaud model's random percolation. After every $N$ iterations of trading, each
182: cluster which is defined in figure 1
183: grows around itself (figure 1(a)) with
184: probability $P_{d}$, collapses and annihilates with probability $P_{n}$,
185: or sleeps with
186: probability $1-P_{d}-P_{n}$. Once a cluster collapses, some new clusters will come
187: into the market at the positions where the collapse occurred (figure 1(b)), with a fixed
188: probability $P_{h}$.
189: We build our model as follows based on the thoughts above:
190:
191: \par (1) Initiation:
192: a $L\times L$ lattice is occupied randomly with probability $P_{in}$, and each cluster
193: is randomly given a state: buying, selling, or sleeping, which are
194: represented by 1, -1 and 0 respectively.
195:
196: \par (2) Trading:
197: at time $t$, each agent in the market sells or buys a unit of
198: stock. Then we calculate the difference between the supply and
199: demand
200: \begin{equation}
201: r=\sum_{i=1}^{m}s_{i}
202: \end{equation}
203: where $m$ is the total number of agents who are presented in the
204: market at $t$ and $s_{i}$ represents the state of the $i$-th
205: agent. The evolution of price follows the rule:
206: \begin{equation}
207: P(t+1)=P(t)e^{r/\lambda}
208: \end{equation}
209: where
210: $\lambda=N_{p}+N_{n}$. Here $N_{p}$ and $N_{n}$ denote the number
211: of buyers and sellers, respectively. Figure 2 shows the price time
212: series, which is rather similar to that of real stock market. And
213: the active probability $2a$ with which the agents choose buying or
214: selling rather than sleeping evolves following the Equ.(3):
215: \begin{equation}
216: a(t)=a(t-1)+lr
217: \end{equation}
218: where $l$ represents the sensitivity of activity $a(t)$ to the
219: difference between the demand and supply. And then, each cluster
220: buys, sells, or sleeps with probabilities $2a(t)p_{b}$,
221: $2a(t)p_{s}$, $1-2a(t)$ respectively, where
222: \begin{equation}
223: p_{b}=\left\{
224: \begin{array}{cc}
225: \mu+\nu_{1}r, &\mbox{$r<0$}\\
226: \mu+\nu_{2}r, &\mbox{$r>0$}
227: \end{array}
228: \right.
229: \end{equation}
230: and
231: \begin{equation}
232: p_{s}=1-p_{b}
233: \end{equation}
234: The first term on the right hand of both of Equ.(4) denotes
235: the probability with which the active one would buy rather than sell without considering
236: the feedback of the price fluctuations.
237: The difference between the case $r<0$ and $r>0$ is the
238: coefficient of the last term on the right hand and takes into account that agents are risk adverse and
239: thus more impressed by a downturn than by an upturn of the market
240: so that the parameters $\nu_{1}$ and $\nu_{2}$ denote the
241: sensitivity of the agent's mentality to the price fluctuations.
242: (The price would fall if $r<0$ and would rise if $r>0$ according
243: to Equ.(2) \cite{4,5,6,7,8,52}). So the value we adopt of
244: $\nu_{1}$ is smaller than that of $\nu_{2}$ \cite{1}.
245: \par (3) Growth:
246: after each $N$ iterations, there are three types of evolution with
247: different probabilities respectively depicted in the following
248: segments: growing, collapsing and sleeping.
249: \par The first situation is that new
250: traders come into the market occupying the empty sites around the
251: old clusters, for example, cluster \textbf{G}, just as the sites
252: marked by hollow nodes proposed in figure 1(a) with the
253: probability
254: \begin{equation}
255: P_{d}^{g}(t+1)=P_{d}^{g}(t)+k(N_{T}-c^{g}(t))
256: \end{equation}
257: where $k$ is a kinetic coefficient and $N_{T}$ is a threshold parameter
258: \cite{2}, and
259: \begin{equation}
260: c^{g}(t)=\sum_{j=1}^{m_{g}}(|s_{j}^{g}|)
261: \end{equation}
262: in which $m_{g}$ represents the scale of the cluster $\textbf{G}$,
263: in other words, the number of nodes which belong to $\textbf{G}$.
264: $s_{j}^{g}$ denotes the state of the $j$-th node belonging to
265: $\textbf{G}$.
266: The probability $P_{d}^{g}(t+1)$ is obviously limited to the range
267: $[0,1]$ so that we have to impose $P_{d}^{g}(t+1)=0$ and $=1$
268: if the recurrence relationship Equ.(6) gives values for
269: $P_{d}^{g}(t+1)<0$ or $>1$.
270: If a few of different clusters whose states are different encounter, one ( noted by $\textbf{V}$ ) will defeat others ( the total
271: number is $n$, including $\textbf{V}$ ) with the probability
272: \begin{equation}
273: P_{v}(t)=|c^{v}(t)|/\sum_{i=1}^{n}|c^{i}(t)|
274: \end{equation}
275: And the evolution due to Equ.(8) would lead to the consequence that the
276: defeated clusters would accept the opinion and adopt the same strategy of the winner. In other words, they are annexed by the winner.
277: By contrary, when the states of the encountered
278: clusters are all the same, they would combine and operate as a
279: whole.
280: \begin{figure}
281: \scalebox{0.888}[0.888]{\includegraphics{price}}
282: \caption{\label{fig:epsart}Time series of the typical evolution of
283: the stock price, where $P_{h}$=0.01. One can see that the trend
284: and fluctuations of the stock price generated by our model are
285: rather similar to that of real stock market.}
286: \end{figure}
287: \begin{figure}
288: \scalebox{1.2}[0.9]{\includegraphics{returns}}
289: \caption{\label{fig:epsart} The returns of simulated price
290: fluctuations for $\delta t$=1. It can be seen that large events
291: are frequent in the fluctuations of stock market when compared
292: with a normal process.}
293: \end{figure}
294: \par The second, each old cluster such as \textbf{Q} collapses with the probability
295: \begin{equation}
296: P_{n}^{q}(t)=c^{q}(t)/L^{2}
297: \end{equation}
298: which indicates that the probability with which a cluster collapses would increase with its
299: growth. When a cluster takes up all of the sites of the
300: lattice, it would surely collapse.
301: Once the old cluster collapses, the members of the new clusters whose states are not necessarily the same as the old one are
302: produced with fixed probability $P_{h}$ and take up the sites where the old cluster has existed.
303: \par The final circumstance, clusters sleep with the probability $1-P_{d}(t)-P_{n}(t)$.
304: \par (4) Repeat step (2) and (3) for enough times.
305:
306: \section{Simulation Results}
307:
308: The typical parameter space we adopt in our simulation is as follows:
309: $l=0.0001$, $k=0.0001$, $N_{T}=50$,
310: $P_{h}=0.01$, $a(0)=0.35$, $P_{d}(0)=1.0$, $N=100$, $\mu=0.59$, $\nu_{1}=0.00005$ and $\nu_{2}=0.0001$. About $100$
311: traders (in other words, $P_{in}$=0.01)
312: are distributed on a square lattice randomly and the initial stock
313: price is $1.0$. The simulation results are very sensitive to some
314: of the parameters such as $l$, $k$, $\mu$, $\nu_{1}$ and
315: $\nu_{2}$. When the values of them are little larger, the price
316: fluctuations would be very exquisite and when they are little
317: smaller, the price trend would be very meek. But the simulation
318: results are not very sensitive to other parameters for other
319: values of them could lead to the results which are in good
320: agreement with the real data, too. But there are some amazing
321: results we should point out: (1) $\mu$ is not 0.5 but 0.59, little
322: larger than 0.5, which is very close to the threshold value: 0.593
323: in the percolation theory which may be a support to the point that
324: the real markets should operate close to the critical point where
325: profitable trade opportunities are barely detectable \cite{50}.
326: The process by which the market self-organizes close to the
327: critical point is more likely to be of evolutionary nature and
328: hence to take place on longer time scales \cite{51}. And this
329: result suggests that the choice whether to buy or to sell is not
330: completely random as the traditional point stands which implies
331: that $\mu$ should be 0.5. (2) From the value space we could see
332: that $\nu_{2}=2\nu_{1}$, which means that the affliction which is
333: brought by losing one unit of wealth would be twice as much as the
334: satisfaction which is brought by gaining the same amount of wealth
335: according to Kahneman's Prospect Theory \cite{52}.
336: \par To compare
337: the statistical properties of the price generated by our model and
338: that of real stock markets further, we study the returns of price
339: which is defined as Equ.(10):
340: \begin{equation}
341: Z(t)=\log P(t+\delta t)-\log P(t)
342: \end{equation}
343: \begin{figure}
344: \scalebox{1.2}[1.2]{\includegraphics{levy}}
345: \caption{\label{fig:epsart}The probability distributions of price
346: returns with $\delta t$=1,2,4,8,16,32,64 respectively. In this
347: figure, the central part of the distribution of returns appears to
348: be well fitted by a l\'{e}vy distribution.}
349: \end{figure}
350:
351: \begin{figure}
352: \scalebox{1.2}[1.0]{\includegraphics{powerlaw}}
353: \caption{\label{fig:epsart}The central peak value as a function of
354: $\delta t$. The slope of the fitted line is $-0.61\pm0.01$ which
355: is very close to the real value 0.62 found in Hang Seng index
356: \cite{36}.}
357: \end{figure}
358:
359: \begin{figure}
360: \scalebox{1.2}[1.0]{\includegraphics{rescale}}
361: \caption{\label{fig:epsart}Re-scaled plot of the probability
362: distributions shown in figure 4. Data collapse is evident after
363: using re-scaled variables with $\alpha=1.61$. The abscissa is the
364: re-scaled returns, the ordinate is the logarithm of re-scaled
365: probability.}
366: \end{figure}
367: Mandelbrot has proposed that the distribution of returns is
368: consistent with a L\'{e}vy stable distribution \cite{33}. In 1995,
369: Mantegna and Stanley analyzed a large set of data of the S\&P500
370: index. It has been reported that the central part of the
371: distribution of S\&P500 returns appears to be well fitted by a
372: L\'{e}vy distribution, but the asymptotic behavior of the
373: distribution shows faster decay than that predicted by a L\'{e}vy
374: distribution \cite{25,35}. The similar characteristic of the
375: distribution of returns is also found in Hang Seng index
376: \cite{36}.
377: Figure 4 shows the probability density of normalized returns, which display a clear L\'evy
378: distribution for $\delta t$=1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64.
379:
380: \par Because larger $\delta t$ implies less data points, it is
381: difficult to determine the parameters characterizing the
382: distributions only by investigating the spreads. Hence, we studied
383: the peak values at the center of the distributions, i.e., the
384: probability of zero return $P_{b}(Z=0)$ as the function of $\delta
385: t$. With this choice, we can investigate the point of each
386: probability distribution which is least affected by noise. Figure
387: 5 shows the central peak value versus $\delta t$ in a
388: log-log plot. It can be seen that all the data is well fitted by
389: a straight line with the slope $-0.61\pm0.01$ which is very close
390: to the real value 0.62 found in Hang Seng index \cite{36}. This observation agrees
391: with theoretical model leading to a L\'{e}vy distribution.
392: \par If we assume that the central part of the distribution of
393: returns can be described by a L\'{e}vy stable symmetrical
394: distribution with an index $\alpha$ and parameter $\gamma$,
395: \begin{equation}
396: P_{b}^{\alpha}(Z,\delta
397: t)\equiv(1/\pi)\int_{0}^{\infty}e^{-\gamma\delta t
398: |q|^{\alpha}}\cos(qZ)dq
399: \end{equation}
400: where $e^{-\gamma\delta t |q|^{\alpha}}$ is the characteristic
401: function of a L\'{e}vy symmetrical stable process, the probability
402: of zero return is given by
403: \begin{equation}
404: P_{b}(0)=P_{b}^{\alpha}(0,\delta
405: t)=\Gamma(1/\alpha)/[\pi\alpha(\gamma\delta t)^{1/\alpha}]
406: \end{equation}
407: where $\Gamma$ is the Gamma function. Using the value
408: $-0.61\pm0.01$ for the slope of the fitted line to the data
409: (figure 5), we obtain the index $\alpha = 1.61\pm0.02$.
410: \par To check whether the L\'{e}vy scaling can be extended to the
411: entire probability distribution of returns generated by our model,
412: we notice that under the transformation:
413: \begin{equation}
414: Z_{s}\equiv Z/[(\delta t)^{(1/\alpha)}]
415: \end{equation}
416: and
417: \begin{equation}
418: P_{bs}(Z_{s})\equiv(\delta t)^{1/\alpha}P_{b}^{\alpha}(Z,\delta
419: t)=(\delta t)^{1/\alpha}P_{b}^{\alpha}[(\delta
420: t)^{1/\alpha}Z_{s},\delta t]
421: \end{equation}
422: the distributions for different time scales $\delta t$ will
423: collapse onto one curve. Figure 6 shows the re-scaled
424: distributions for the same data in figure 4 in the scaled
425: variables, i.e., $P_{bs}(Z_{s})$ versus $Z_{s}$. Data collapse is
426: evident, except for some data points in the tails for large
427: $\delta t$. The closer to the central point $Z_{s}=0$, the
428: stronger is the extent of data collapse. These observations imply
429: that the L\'{e}vy distribution is a better description of the
430: dynamics of the random process underlying the variation of returns
431: in the central part of the probability distribution $P_{b}(Z)$
432: over $\delta t$ spanning at least two orders of magnitude.
433:
434: \begin{figure}
435: \scalebox{1.2}[1.0]{\includegraphics{exponent}}
436: \caption{\label{fig:epsart}The accumulate probability
437: distributions $P_{b}(g>Z)$ of 1-minute returns generated by our
438: model. For data in the region $10\leq Z \leq 200$, regression fits
439: yield $\alpha=2.93$ (positive tail) and $\alpha=2.78$ (negative
440: tail).}
441: \end{figure}
442:
443: \par In order to determine if an exponential truncated L\'{e}vy
444: distribution can be used to describe the stochastic process and to
445: investigate the kind of asymptotic behavior outside the L\'{e}vy
446: stable region, we study the accumulate distribution $P_{b}(g>Z)$
447: of the fluctuations of financial data.
448: \par For a stable symmetric L\'{e}vy distribution ($0<\alpha<2$),
449: the two tails show a power-law asymptotic behavior
450: \begin{equation}
451: P_{b}(Z)\thicksim Z^{-(1+\alpha)}
452: \end{equation}
453: and hence the second moment diverges. This leads to an asymptotic
454: power-law for the accumulate distribution for both the positive
455: and negative tails \cite{33} in the form
456: \begin{equation}
457: P_{b}(g>Z)\thicksim Z^{-\alpha}
458: \end{equation}
459: \par Figure 7 shows the accumulate probability distribution of
460: returns $P_{b}(g>Z)$ for $\delta t=1$ min. for the data generated
461: by our model. For data in the region $10\leq Z \leq 200$,
462: regression fits yield $\alpha=2.93$ (positive tail) and
463: $\alpha=2.78$ (negative tail). These results appear to be outside
464: the L\'{e}vy stable range of $0<\alpha<2$ but they fit well the
465: result produced from the real data which is near 3.
466:
467: \section{Conclusion}
468: Compared with the Cond-Bouchaud percolation model, our model
469: presents a nonconservation market. With the evolution of the
470: model's topology, there are new traders coming in and old ones
471: leaving, which depicts the real stock markets more approximately.
472: What is more, the process of the amalgamation and expansion, and
473: the breakdown of the clusters in our model well consists with the
474: phenomena (so called herd behaviors) in the real stock market that
475: more and more people would take the same performance when they
476: found more and more people around them take the same action. Some
477: other simulations show that the information entropy, when we
478: consider the clusters as various information resources and the
479: process of merging and collapsing as the spreading and dying out
480: of the information, has some relationships with the point which we
481: define as the break-point of price. Moreover, there are also some
482: amazing facts in the results of our simulations such as why the
483: first term on the right hand of Equ.(4) approximate to the
484: threshold value in the percolation theory. Since the main goal of
485: this article is to establish and describe the model itself, we
486: would not give detailed simulation results and analysis, which
487: will be given elsewhere soon.
488:
489: \section{Acknowledgement}
490: This work has been partially supported by the National Natural
491: Science Foundation of China under Grant No.70171053 and
492: No.70271070, the Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral
493: Program of Higher Education (SRFDP No.20020358009), and the
494: Foundation for graduate students of University of Science and
495: Technology of China under Grant No. USTC-SS-0501.
496:
497: \begin{thebibliography}{1}
498: \bibitem{53} P. Bak, \emph{How Nature Works: the Science of Self-organized
499: Criticality} (Copernicus, New York, 1996).
500: \bibitem{54} D. Sornette, \emph{Critical Phenomena in Natural
501: Sciences} (Springer, Berlin, 2000).
502: \bibitem{55} H. Haken, \emph{Synergetics, an Introduction} 3rd ed.
503: (Springer, Berlin, 1983).
504: \bibitem{56} H. Haken, \emph{Advanced Stnergtics.} 2nd ed. (Springer, Berlin,
505: 1987).
506: \bibitem{57} L. Lam, Skeptic, {\bf 8}(3), 71 (2000).
507: \bibitem{58} L. Lam, \emph{Nonlinear Physics for Beginners: Fractals, Chaos, Solitions, Pattern Formation, Cellular Automata and Complex
508: Systems} (World Scientific Press, River Edge, NJ, 2000)
509: \bibitem{37} S. M. de Oliveira, P. M. C. de Oliveira and K. Stauffer,\emph{ Evolution, Money, War and Computers}
510: (Teubner, Stuttgart-Leipzig, 1999).
511: \bibitem{41} J. Y. Campbell, A. W. Lo and A. C. MacKinlay, \emph{The
512: Ecomometrics of Financial Markets} (Princeton University Press,
513: Princeton, NJ, 1997).
514: \bibitem{42} T. Lux, Economic. J., {\bf 105}, 881 (1995).
515: \bibitem{43} T. Lux and M. Marchesi, Nature, {\bf 397}, 498 (1999).
516: \bibitem{44} T. Lux, Appl. Financial Economics, {\bf 6}, 463 (1996).
517: \bibitem{45} P. Gopikrishnan, M. Meyer, L. A. N. Amaral and H. E.
518: Stanley, Eur. Phys. J. B, {\bf 3}, 139 (1998).
519: \bibitem{46} G. J. Stigler, J. Business, {\bf 37}, 117 (1964).
520: \bibitem{47} D. Stauffer and D. Sornette, Physica A, {\bf
521: 271}, (1999).
522: \bibitem{16} R. Thaler, \emph{Advances in Behavioral Finance} (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1993).
523: \bibitem{17} A. Lo, Financial Analysis Journal, {\bf 55}, 13 (1999).
524: \bibitem{32} D. Friedman, Econometrica, {\bf 59}, 637 (1991).
525: \bibitem{18} W. B. Arthur, J. Holland, B. LeBaron, et al. \emph{Asset pricing
526: under endogenous expectations in an artificial stock market}. In
527: W. B. Arthur, S. Durlauf, D. Lane ed. \emph{The Economy as an
528: Evolving Complex System I} (Boston: Addison-Wesley, 1997, pp.
529: 15-44).
530: \bibitem{19} S. Grossman and F. Stiglitz, American Economic Review, {\bf 70}, 393 (1980).
531: \bibitem{20} M. Bray, Journal of Economic Theory, {\bf 26}, 318 (1982).
532: \bibitem{21} S. -H. Chen and C. -H. Yeh, Journal of Economic Dynamics
533: \& Control, {\bf 25}, 363 (2001).
534: \bibitem{22} M. Lettau, Journal of Economic Dynamics \&
535: Control, {\bf 21}, 1117 (1997).
536: \bibitem{3} T. Zhou, P. -L. Zhou, B. -H. Wang, Z. -N. Tang and J.
537: Liu, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B, {\bf 18}, 2697(2004).
538: \bibitem{23} R. Cont, Quant. Finance, {\bf 1}, 223 (2001).
539: \bibitem{24} M. L\'{e}vy and S. Solomon, \emph{Microscopic Simulation of Financial Markets} (Academic Press, New York 2000).
540: \bibitem{25} R. N. Mantegna and H. E. Stanley, Nature, {\bf 376}, 46 (1995).
541: \bibitem{28} P. Gopikrishnan, V. Plerou, L. A. N. Amaral, M. Meyer and H. E. Stanley, Phys. Rev. E, {\bf 60}, 5305 (1999).
542: \bibitem{30} J. F. Muzy, D. Sornette, J. Deloux and A. Arneodo, Quant. Finance, {\bf 1}, 131 (2001);
543: A. Arneodo, J. F. Muzy and D. Sornette, Eur. Phys. J. B, {\bf 2}, 227 (1998).
544: \bibitem{48} R. Topol, Economic. J., {\bf 101}, 768(1991).
545: \bibitem{49} A. Bannerjee, Rev. Econ. Studies, {\bf 60}, 309(1993).
546: \bibitem{31} R. Cont and J. -P. Bouchaud, Macroeconomic Dynamics,
547: {\bf 4}, 170 (2000). For a review of Monte Carlo simulations of
548: this model see D. Stauffer, Adv. Complex Systems, {\bf 4}, 19
549: (2001).
550: \bibitem{38} D. Stauffer and A. Aharony, \emph{Introduction to Percolation
551: Theory} (Taylor and Francis, London, 1994).
552: \bibitem{39} A. Bunde and S. Havlin, \emph{Fractals and Disordered
553: Systems} (Springer, Berlin, 1996).
554: \bibitem{40} M. Sahimi, \emph{Applications of Percolation Theory} (Taylor
555: and Francis, London, 1994).
556: \bibitem{4} R. J. Shiller, \emph{Irrational Exuberance} (Princeton University
557: Press, Princeton, 2000).
558: \bibitem{5} Baxter, Marianne and U. Jermann, American Economic
559: Review, {\bf 87}, 177(1997).
560: \bibitem{6} Bartholomew and J. David, \emph{Stochastic Models for Social
561: Processes} (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1967).
562: \bibitem{7} Basu and Sanjoy, Journal of Finance, {\bf 3}, 663 (1977).
563: \bibitem{8} Batra and Ravi, \emph{The Great Depression of 1990: Why It's Got to Happen, How to Protect
564: Yourself} (Simon \& Schuster, New York, 1987).
565: \bibitem{52} D. Kalheman and A. Tversky, Economitrica, {\bf 47},
566: 263 (1979).
567: \bibitem{1} I. Chang, D. Stauffer and R. B. Pandey, arXiv:
568: cont-mat/0108345.
569: \bibitem{2} F. S. A. Cavalcante, A. A. Moreira, U. M. S. Costa and J.
570: S. Andrade Jr., Physica A, {\bf 311}, 313(2002).
571: \bibitem{50} D. Challet, A. Chessa, M. Marsili and Y. -C. Zhang,
572: Quant. Finance, {\bf 1}, 168 (2001).
573: \bibitem{51} T. Lux and M. Marchesi, Nature, {\bf 397}, 498 (1999).
574: \bibitem{33} B. B. Mandelbrot, J. Business, {\bf 36}, 294 (1963).
575: \bibitem{35} R. N. Mantegna and H. E. Stanley, Physica A, {\bf 239}, 255 (1997).
576: \bibitem{36} B. -H. Wang and P. -M. Hui, Eur. Phys.
577: J. B, {\bf 21}, 573 (2001).
578:
579:
580:
581: \end{thebibliography}
582: \end{document}
583: