SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Cars Hommes

Publications and source records attributed to Cars Hommes.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Machine Spirits: Speculation and Adaptation of LLM Agents in Asset Markets

As Large Language Models (LLMs) become increasingly integrated into financial systems, understanding their behavioural properties is crucial. Do LLMs conform to the rational expectations paradigm, do they exhibit human-like "animal spirits", or do they instead manifest distinct "machine spirits"? We investigate these questions with a simulated financial market, exploring the behaviour of 15 LLMs spanning a range of sizes, capabilities, and providers. Our results show that LLMs exhibit a spectrum of economic behaviours, from stable coordination on the fundamental value to human-like speculative bubbles. These behaviours are generally inconsistent with the rational expectations hypothesis. We also consider an ecology of heterogeneous agents, a more realistic setting compared to markets with identical LLM agents. These mixed markets can produce outcomes which vary substantially across repeated simulations. Even the most advanced models fail to consistently stabilise the market, with price bubbles sometimes forming despite only a minority of agents naturally forming bubbles. Instead, advanced models in mixed markets adapt their forecasting strategies to the behaviour of other agents. This adaptation can allow them to successfully exploit less sophisticated counterparts and achieve higher profits, but can also contribute to increased market volatility. These findings suggest that the introduction of AI agents into financial markets fundamentally reshapes their ecology. In particular, heterogeneous populations of LLMs can generate endogenous instability, while individual-level adaptation may amplify, rather than mitigate, market volatility.

q-fin.TR

Can Generative AI agents behave like humans? Evidence from laboratory market experiments

We explore the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs) to replicate human behavior in economic market experiments. Compared to previous studies, we focus on dynamic feedback between LLM agents: the decisions of each LLM impact the market price at the current step, and so affect the decisions of the other LLMs at the next step. We compare LLM behavior to market dynamics observed in laboratory settings and assess their alignment with human participants' behavior. Our findings indicate that LLMs do not adhere strictly to rational expectations, displaying instead bounded rationality, similarly to human participants. Providing a minimal context window i.e. memory of three previous time steps, combined with a high variability setting capturing response heterogeneity, allows LLMs to replicate broad trends seen in human experiments, such as the distinction between positive and negative feedback markets. However, differences remain at a granular level--LLMs exhibit less heterogeneity in behavior than humans. These results suggest that LLMs hold promise as tools for simulating realistic human behavior in economic contexts, though further research is needed to refine their accuracy and increase behavioral diversity.

econ.GN

Do investors trade too much? A laboratory experiment

We run experimental asset markets to investigate the emergence of excess trading and the occurrence of synchronised trading activity leading to crashes in the artificial markets. The market environment favours early investment in the risky asset and no posterior trading, i.e. a buy-and-hold strategy with a most probable return of over 600%. We observe that subjects trade too much, and due to the market impact that we explicitly implement, this is detrimental to their wealth. The asset market experiment was followed by risk aversion measurement. We find that preference for risk systematically leads to higher activity rates (and lower final wealth). We also measure subjects' expectations of future prices and find that their actions are fully consistent with their expectations. In particular, trading subjects try to beat the market and make profits by playing a buy low, sell high strategy. Finally, we have not detected any major market crash driven by collective panic modes, but rather a weaker but significant tendency of traders to synchronise their entry and exit points in the market.

q-fin.GN