Econophysicist Predicts Rogue Financial Waves
If financial markets behave like nonlinear wave-like systems, then rogue waves are an inevitable consequence.
kfc 11/25/2009
- 11 Comments
On New Year's Day 1995, a single giant wave hit the Draupner oil platform in the North Sea off the coast of Norway. By chance, the platform was fitted with laser measuring equipment which recorded the height of waves as they passed by. This one measured in at an unprecedented 25.6 metres, about the size of a seven storey office block. The Draupner event finally confirmed the existence of rogue waves, previously known only to science through the anecdotal evidence of the few who had seen and survived them.
Curiously, the existence of rogue waves was predicted mathematically more than ten years earlier by Howell Peregrine at the University of Bristol in the UK. The theoretical prediction and the observational confirmation should have generated an obvious question: shouldn't rogue waves also occur in other wave-like systems?
And yet it wasn't until 2007 that the first optical rogue waves were observed in an optical fibre. Since then things have moved rapidly. This blog recently discussed the first measurement of rogue microwaves and earlier this year another group predicted the existence of rogue matter waves using numerical simulations.
But what of more abstract systems? Today Zhenya Yan at the Institute of Systems Science in Beijing says that rogue waves can also occur in financial systems, and in particular in equity markets. Traditionally, econophysicists have modelled equity pricing using the Black-Scholes economic model, in which prices change stochastically, like the movement of particles under Brownian motion.
Researchers have long known that the Black-Scholes model cannot account for the observed volatility of the real market but had no alternative to turn to. However, earlier this month, Vladimir Ivancevic at the Defence Science & Technology Organisation in Australia proposed a nonlinear wave model as an alternative to Black-Scholes.
The Ivancevic Option Pricing Model approximates to Black Scholes under certain circumstances but also allows for a rich variety of other behaviours and so has the potential to better describe real markets. Much of this behaviour is as yet unexplored.
Enter Yan, who points out today that one solution of a nonlinear wave system is a rogue wave, an event of far greater magnitude than would be expected by any standard method of analysis.
That's interesting. There's no shortage of anecdotal evidence for the existence of financial rogue waves. Look at the Asian financial crisis of 1997 or the current global financial crisis. But econophysicists will want more than that to confirm that financial rogue waves really exist.
Perhaps what they need now is the financial equivalent of the Draupner oil platform measuring ambient wave height and waiting for the big one to hit.
Ref:arxiv.org/abs/0911.4259: Financial Rogue Waves
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
tiknonov
2 Comments
Pseudo-Science
Sorry, but to me this article is pseudo-science. The reasoning goes something like this: Rogue waves exist. Financial crisis exists. Both are extreme events. Therfore a physical model for rogue waves is a good model for option pricing. I am very surprised that this article has been accepted for publication in a physics journal.
Reply
ZephirX
246 Comments
Re: Pseudo-Science
There exists a simple connection between both rogue waves at the water surface and financial markets. The undulated surface of water becomes larger and energy waves are propagating slower along it - so that every large wave traps another ripples from it. The stock price changes attract speculators and their money - so that a sort of autofocusation energy exists there, typical for avalanche-like soliton formation, too.
Actually both these effects follows from properties of gradient driven reality, as described with dense aether theory (in dense particle gas the only observable artifacts are density fluctuations of it).
Reply
flared0ne
395 Comments
Heh... You heard "Pseudo Science" and responded "Over Here!"
"autofocusastion energy"? And saying "gradient driven reality" is like saying "the sun comes up in the east" -- much of LIFE is "gradient driven" AND has zip-zero-zilch (i.e., NOTHING) to do with AWT. And add "financial markets" and "stochastic analysis" to the list of "Things which AWT has nothing to do with". Your sock puppet is continuing to look increasingly thread-bare...
Back to the original post, though: "and so has the potential to better describe real markets." is just a bit ho-hum -- because this is STILL (by definition) only vaguely reactive, nothing proactive -- since we can't really PREDICT events, can't CAUSE events, and can't PREVENT events. To be honest, we aren't all that good at DOCUMENTING events, in order to analyze "what just happened?" with any credibility...
Anyone can claim "truth" (but no particular insight) when saying essentially that it is POSSIBLE, at any time, for a myriad of asynchronous factors to suddenly occur synchronously. Yeah, so? We KNEW that already.
Now if a formal statement of "aha, a working hypothesis of a mechanism, which means that these other tools from over THERE suddenly look like they might be useful HERE too" shows up, THAT would be worthy of time-and-attention.
Reply
ZephirX
246 Comments
Re: Heh... You heard "Pseudo Science" and responded "Over Here!"
>And saying "gradient driven reality" is like saying "the sun comes up in the east" -- much of LIFE is "gradient driven"
Every fact has some reason. In dense aether model such insight is just a theorem: if you consider, the Universe is formed with dense particle gas, then the density fluctuations of it are everything, what you could see from it or to serve as an environment for spreading of transverse waves of light.
Why do we use transverse waves for observation of reality? Because they're spreading in slowest way through such particle environment - so that the universe appears as large, as possible in the light.
Reply
flared0ne
395 Comments
(yawn...)
"Every fact has a reason." Not true. That's like saying every product has a market (also not true, and the downfall of many a wannabe-entrepreneur).
And the "fact" you hold that opinion is one "reason" you don't get picked for meaningful discussions in this venue. But continuing...
"Because they" (transverse waves) "are spreading in slowest way through such particle environment"... where to start... Do you understand the definition of "transverse"? More importantly, do you understand that "the orientation of oscillations relative to the direction of energy transfer" will generally have zip (not-much) to do with "faster" or "slower" through any given environment??
"transverse" tends to mean more in a context where "perpendicular to direction of propagation" carries a sub-text of "potential energy associated with mass elevation-above-baseline"; e.g., a physical wave in water, in a 2-dimensional context. "Transverse" is rarely pertinent in a 3-dimensional "essentially gaseous" volume.
"Transverse" is NOT meaningful when talking about propagation of a light wave, where "wave" is associated with a region of "more energy" surrounded by a region of "less energy", and where "wave" actually suggests that this region of "more energy" is somehow translating across "the environment".
People who jump headlong into analysis-by-"analogy derived from a descriptive graphic" tend to be sloppy (if they don't stay "crispy"). "Rogue Wave" has a whole "boat load" of connotations that simply don't apply to the context at hand, connotations that are "Get In The Way of a rationally-focused analysis" sloppy.
Just like your use of words that "sound good", carry lots of "deep meaning" and "seem to resonate with your gut-feel" for what you're trying to express -- without regard for whether they are PERTINENT to your discussion. Sloppy. Like I said, you need to fire some of your copy-writing monkeys.
Reply
ZephirX
246 Comments
Re: (yawn...)
>That's like saying every product has a market
Nope, it's like the saying, every effect has its consequence. But every product has it's producer.
Reply
tiknonov
2 Comments
Re: Pseudo-Science
You just translated the line of argument that I criticised into physics jargon.. Water waves exist, bubbles in financial markets exist.. therefore a good model for waves is a good model for financial markets.
Believe it or not, people have been doing research in financial markets for decades, and it would not be a mistake to look at some of this work. Now if the author could show that starting from a reasonable model of individual traders and their interaction you could obtain (in a many-trader limit) a rogue wave model.. then I would be impressed. But clearly this is far from what he is doing.
Reply
flared0ne
395 Comments
Good point.
Would you agree, from what sounds like an experienced perspective, that there MAY be a correlation between what was perhaps-misleadingly-described here as a "Rogue Wave" and what could be perhaps-better-described as an "emergent" pattern associated with "flocking behavior"??
"Individual agents", each with their own "self-seeking agenda" within a "common context goal-structure"; this begs to be classified as a typical "emergent behavior" -- and analyzed with THAT set of tools and increasingly-understood perspectives. Where "rogue wave" is better viewed as an uncharacteristically "larger than usual" "flock" of temporarily-synchronous "agents". At least "flock" doesn't have the same sense of "going somewhere" which "wave" has...
As I was chiding Zephir-whatever earlier: word-choice DOES become pertinent. Myself, I hypothesize about some type of text-scanning process which can algorithmically convert statements into equations -- equations which are then provably meaningful (useful as tools for further analysis) only to the extent that the "source" word-choices were precise and appropriate. Makes a useful "excuse" to bolster an obsession, anyway...
Reply