Agent-based models (ABMs) are valuable for modelling complex, potentially out-of-equilibria scenarios. However, ABMs have long suffered from the Lucas critique, stating that agent behaviour should adapt to environmental changes. Furthermore, the environment itself often adapts to these behavioural changes, creating a complex bi-level adaptation problem. Recent progress integrating multi-agent reinforcement learning into ABMs introduces adaptive agent behaviour, beginning to address the first part of this critique, however, the approaches are still relatively ad hoc, lacking a general formulation, and furthermore, do not tackle the second aspect of simultaneously adapting environmental level characteristics in addition to the agent behaviours. In this work, we develop a generic two-layer framework for ADaptive AGEnt based modelling (ADAGE) for addressing these problems. This framework formalises the bi-level problem as a Stackelberg game with conditional behavioural policies, providing a consolidated framework for adaptive agent-based modelling based on solving a coupled set of non-linear equations. We demonstrate how this generic approach encapsulates several common (previously viewed as distinct) ABM tasks, such as policy design, calibration, scenario generation, and robust behavioural learning under one unified framework. We provide example simulations on multiple complex economic and financial environments, showing the strength of the novel framework under these canonical settings, addressing long-standing critiques of traditional ABMs.

We propose a decentralized market model in which agents can negotiate bilateral contracts. This builds on a similar, but centralized, model of trading networks introduced by Hatfield et al. (2013). Prior work has established that fully-substitutable preferences guarantee the existence of competitive equilibria which can be centrally computed. Our motivation comes from the fact that prices in markets such as over-the-counter markets and used car markets arise from \textit{decentralized} negotiation among agents, which has left open an important question as to whether equilibrium prices can emerge from agent-to-agent bilateral negotiations. We design a best response dynamic intended to capture such negotiations between market participants. We assume fully substitutable preferences for market participants. In this setting, we provide proofs of convergence for sparse markets ({covering many real world markets of interest}), and experimental results for more general cases, demonstrating that prices indeed reach equilibrium, quickly, via bilateral negotiations. Our best response dynamic, and its convergence behavior, forms an important first step in understanding how decentralized markets reach, and retain, equilibrium.

We develop a novel two-layer approach for optimising mortgage relief products through a simulated multi-agent mortgage environment. While the approach is generic, here the environment is calibrated to the US mortgage market based on publicly available census data and regulatory guidelines. Through the simulation layer, we assess the resilience of households to exogenous income shocks, while the optimisation layer explores strategies to improve the robustness of households to these shocks by making novel mortgage assistance products available to households. Households in the simulation are adaptive, learning to make mortgage-related decisions (such as product enrolment or strategic foreclosures) that maximize their utility, balancing their available liquidity and equity. We show how this novel two-layer simulation approach can successfully design novel mortgage assistance products to improve household resilience to exogenous shocks, and balance the costs of providing such products through post-hoc analysis. Previously, such analysis could only be conducted through expensive pilot studies involving real participants, demonstrating the benefit of the approach for designing and evaluating financial products.

Mortgages account for the largest portion of household debt in the United States, totaling around \$12 trillion nationwide. In times of financial hardship, alleviating mortgage burdens is essential for supporting affected households. The mortgage servicing industry plays a vital role in offering this assistance, yet there has been limited research modelling the complex relationship between households and servicers. To bridge this gap, we developed an agent-based model that explores household behavior and the effectiveness of relief measures during financial distress. Our model represents households as adaptive learning agents with realistic financial attributes. These households experience exogenous income shocks, which may influence their ability to make mortgage payments. Mortgage servicers provide relief options to these households, who then choose the most suitable relief based on their unique financial circumstances and individual preferences. We analyze the impact of various external shocks and the success of different mortgage relief strategies on specific borrower subgroups. Through this analysis, we show that our model can not only replicate real-world mortgage studies but also act as a tool for conducting a broad range of what-if scenario analyses. Our approach offers fine-grained insights that can inform the development of more effective and inclusive mortgage relief solutions.

Agent-based models (ABMs) have shown promise for modelling various real world phenomena incompatible with traditional equilibrium analysis. However, a critical concern is the manual definition of behavioural rules in ABMs. Recent developments in multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) offer a way to address this issue from an optimisation perspective, where agents strive to maximise their utility, eliminating the need for manual rule specification. This learning-focused approach aligns with established economic and financial models through the use of rational utility-maximising agents. However, this representation departs from the fundamental motivation for ABMs: that realistic dynamics emerging from bounded rationality and agent heterogeneity can be modelled. To resolve this apparent disparity between the two approaches, we propose a novel technique for representing heterogeneous processing-constrained agents within a MARL framework. The proposed approach treats agents as constrained optimisers with varying degrees of strategic skills, permitting departure from strict utility maximisation. Behaviour is learnt through repeated simulations with policy gradients to adjust action likelihoods. To allow efficient computation, we use parameterised shared policy learning with distributions of agent skill levels. Shared policy learning avoids the need for agents to learn individual policies yet still enables a spectrum of bounded rational behaviours. We validate our model's effectiveness using real-world data on a range of canonical $n$-agent settings, demonstrating significantly improved predictive capability.

The efficient market hypothesis (EMH), based on rational expectations and market equilibrium, is the dominant perspective for modelling economic markets. However, the most notable critique of the EMH is the inability to model periods of out-of-equilibrium behaviour in the absence of any significant external news. When such dynamics emerge endogenously, the traditional economic frameworks provide no explanation for such behaviour and the deviation from equilibrium. This work offers an alternate perspective explaining the endogenous emergence of punctuated out-of-equilibrium dynamics based on bounded rational agents. In a concise market entrance game, we show how boundedly rational strategic reasoning can lead to endogenously emerging crises, exhibiting fat tails in "returns". We also show how other common stylised facts of economic markets, such as clustered volatility, can be explained due to agent diversity (or lack thereof) and the varying learning updates across the agents. This work explains various stylised facts and crisis emergence in economic markets, in the absence of any external news, based purely on agent interactions and bounded rational reasoning.

Bounded rationality is an important consideration stemming from the fact that agents often have limits on their processing abilities, making the assumption of perfect rationality inapplicable to many real tasks. We propose an information-theoretic approach to the inference of agent decisions under Smithian competition. The model explicitly captures the boundedness of agents (limited in their information-processing capacity) as the cost of information acquisition for expanding their prior beliefs. The expansion is measured as the Kullblack-Leibler divergence between posterior decisions and prior beliefs. When information acquisition is free, the \textit{homo economicus} agent is recovered, while in cases when information acquisition becomes costly, agents instead revert to their prior beliefs. The maximum entropy principle is used to infer least-biased decisions, based upon the notion of Smithian competition formalised within the Quantal Response Statistical Equilibrium framework. The incorporation of prior beliefs into such a framework allowed us to systematically explore the effects of prior beliefs on decision-making, in the presence of market feedback. We verified the proposed model using Australian housing market data, showing how the incorporation of prior knowledge alters the resulting agent decisions. Specifically, it allowed for the separation (and analysis) of past beliefs and utility maximisation behaviour of the agent.