Recent explosion of reinforcement learning in financial trading (RLFT) research has shown stellar performance on many quantitative trading tasks.

Then, we discuss on the tutorials and scripts of the core features in TradeMaster.

Agent-based modeling (ABM) is a principal approach for studying complex systems. By decomposing a system into simpler, interacting agents, agent-based modeling (ABM) allows researchers to observe the emergence of complex phenomena. High-performance array computing libraries like JAX can help scale such computational models to a large number of agents by using automatic vectorization and just-in-time (JIT) compilation. One of the caveats of using JAX to achieve such scaling is that the shapes of arrays used in the computational model should remain immutable throughout the simulation. In the context of agent-based modeling (ABM), this can pose constraints on certain agent manipulation operations that require flexible data structures. A subset of which is represented by the ability to update a dynamically selected number of agents by applying distinct changes to them during a simulation. To this effect, we introduce ABMax, an ABM framework based on JAX that implements multiple just-in-time (JIT) compilable algorithms to provide this functionality. On the canonical predation model benchmark, ABMax achieves runtime performance comparable to state-of-the-art implementations. Further, we show that this functionality can also be vectorized, making it possible to run many similar agent-based models in parallel. We also present two examples in the form of a traffic-flow model and a financial market model to show the use case of ABMax

Then, we discuss on the tutorials and scripts of the core features in TradeMaster.

In this paper, our objective is to develop a multi-agent financial system that incorporates simulated trading, a technique extensively utilized by financial professionals. While current LLM-based agent models demonstrate competitive performance, they still exhibit significant deviations from real-world fund companies. A critical distinction lies in the agents' reliance on ``post-reflection'', particularly in response to adverse outcomes, but lack a distinctly human capability: long-term prediction of future trends. Therefore, we introduce QuantAgents, a multi-agent system integrating simulated trading, to comprehensively evaluate various investment strategies and market scenarios without assuming actual risks. Specifically, QuantAgents comprises four agents: a simulated trading analyst, a risk control analyst, a market news analyst, and a manager, who collaborate through several meetings. Moreover, our system incentivizes agents to receive feedback on two fronts: performance in real-world markets and predictive accuracy in simulated trading. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our framework excels across all metrics, yielding an overall return of nearly 300% over the three years (https://quantagents.github.io/).

Order book imbalance (OBI) - buy orders minus sell orders near the best quote - measures supply-demand imbalance that can move prices. OBI is positively correlated with returns, and some investors try to use it to improve performance. Large orders placed at once can reveal intent, invite front-running, raise volatility, and cause losses. Execution algorithms therefore split parent orders into smaller lots to limit price distortion. In principle, using OBI inside such algorithms could improve execution, but prior evidence is scarce because isolating OBI's effect in real markets is nearly impossible amid many external factors. Multi-agent simulation offers a way to study this. In an artificial market, individual actors are agents whose rules and interactions form the model. This study builds an execution algorithm that accounts for OBI, tests it across several market patterns in artificial markets, and analyzes mechanisms, comparing it with a conventional (OBI-agnostic) algorithm. Results: (i) In stable markets, the OBI strategy's performance depends on the number of order slices; outcomes vary with how the parent order is partitioned. (ii) In markets with unstable prices, the OBI-based algorithm outperforms the conventional approach. (iii) Under spoofing manipulation, the OBI strategy is not significantly worse than the conventional algorithm, indicating limited vulnerability to spoofing. Overall, OBI provides a useful signal for execution. Incorporating OBI can add value - especially in volatile conditions - while remaining reasonably robust to spoofing; in calm markets, benefits are sensitive to slicing design.

Options and structured products, as pivotal financial derivatives, provide contract holders with specific payoff structures based on the performance of underlying assets at predetermined times and conditions. They serve as effective tools for investment institutions to manage risk, hedge exposures, and optimize investment portfolios. With the continuous development of financial markets and the diversification of investor demands, financial institutions have invented a wide variety of exotic options based on the principles and experience of standard options. Exotic options can be further categorized according to their complexity: relatively simple exotic options such as Asian options, barrier options, lookback options, and ratchet options primarily add a single feature to standard options; while highly complex structured products like snowball products, phoenix notes, shark fin options, and cumulative products feature multiple path-dependent conditions and intricate payoff structures. These innovative financial instruments not only broaden investor choices but also provide powerful tools for more refined and personalized risk management and investment strategies[1]. Precisely because exotic options and structured products exhibit high levels of diversity, customization, and structural complexity, accurate pricing remains a core challenge for all market participants.

Financial bubbles often arrive without much warning, but create long-lasting economic effects. For example, during the dot-com bubble, innovative technologies created market disruptions through excitement for a promised bright future. Such technologies originated from research where scientists had developed them for years prior to their entry into the markets. That raises a question on the possibility of analyzing scientific publishing data (e.g. citation networks) leading up to a bubble for signals that may forecast the rise and fall of similar future bubbles. To that end, we utilized temporal SNAs to detect possible relationships between the publication citation networks of scientists and financial market data during two modern eras of rapidly shifting technology: 1) dot-com era from 1994 to 2001 and 2) AI era from 2017 to 2024. Results showed that the patterns from the dot-com era (which did end in a bubble) did not definitively predict the rise and fall of an AI bubble. While yearly citation networks reflected possible changes in publishing behavior of scientists between the two eras, there was a subset of AI era scientists whose publication influence patterns mirrored those during the dot-com era. Upon further analysis using multiple analysis techniques (LSTM, KNN, AR X/GARCH), the data seems to suggest two possibilities for the AI era: unprecedented form of financial bubble unseen or that no bubble exists. In conclusion, our findings imply that the patterns present in the dot-com era do not effectively translate in such a manner to apply them to the AI market.

Sentiment analysis, widely used in product reviews, also impacts financial markets by influencing asset prices through microblogs and news articles. Despite research in sentiment-driven finance, many studies focus on sentence-level classification, overlooking its practical application in trading. This study bridges that gap by evaluating sentiment-based trading strategies for generating positive alpha. We conduct a backtesting analysis using sentiment predictions from three models (two classification and one regression) applied to news articles on Dow Jones 30 stocks, comparing them to the benchmark Buy&Hold strategy. Results show all models produced positive returns, with the regression model achieving the highest return of 50.63% over 28 months, outperforming the benchmark Buy&Hold strategy. This highlights the potential of sentiment in enhancing investment strategies and financial decision-making.

Evaluating consistency in large language models (LLMs) is crucial for ensuring reliability, particularly in complex, multi-step interactions between humans and LLMs. Traditional self-consistency methods often miss subtle semantic changes in natural language and functional shifts in code or equations, which can accumulate over multiple transformations. To address this, we propose ConsistencyChecker, a tree-based evaluation framework designed to measure consistency through sequences of reversible transformations, including machine translation tasks and AI-assisted programming tasks. In our framework, nodes represent distinct text states, while edges correspond to pairs of inverse operations. Dynamic and LLM-generated benchmarks ensure a fair assessment of the model's generalization ability and eliminate benchmark leakage. Consistency is quantified based on similarity across different depths of the transformation tree. Experiments on eight models from various families and sizes show that ConsistencyChecker can distinguish the performance of different models. Notably, our consistency scores-computed entirely without using WMT paired data-correlate strongly (r > 0.7) with WMT 2024 auto-ranking, demonstrating the validity of our benchmark-free approach. Our implementation is available at: https://github.com/ulab-uiuc/consistencychecker.