Digital Twin-Based Simulation for Multi-Agent Financial Risk Decision Making

Authors

  • Luigina Sagese Department of Computer Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA.
  • Candelario Caballero Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, NV, USA.

Keywords:

digital twins; multi-agent systems; financial risk; systemic risk; market regime shifts; simulation governance; fairness; resilience; financial regulation

Abstract

Digital twin-based simulation is emerging as a systems-level approach for understanding financial risk when markets are populated by heterogeneous algorithmic agents, human traders, institutions, and regulators. This paper examines how digital twins can support multi-agent financial risk decision making by integrating market infrastructure, agent behavior, regime detection, governance constraints, and stress-testing scenarios into a continuously updating computational representation. It argues that the central contribution of digital twins is not merely predictive accuracy but structural observability: the capacity to trace how decisions, incentives, data flows, and market mechanisms interact under normal and stressed conditions. The discussion emphasizes architecture, trust calibration, fairness, robustness, sustainability, and policy implications. It considers how multi-agent simulation can model liquidity fragmentation, herding, contagion, flash events, and regulatory intervention while acknowledging limits related to validation, data quality, adversarial behavior, and institutional adoption. Particular attention is given to market regime shifts, where historical regularities weaken and agent strategies must be recalibrated. The paper concludes that digital twin ecosystems should be governed as socio-technical infrastructures, with transparent assumptions, auditable decision pathways, and participatory oversight. Without such governance, digital twins risk becoming sophisticated but opaque instruments that concentrate power and obscure accountability. With appropriate design, however, they can improve systemic risk preparedness, support adaptive regulation, and enable more resilient financial decision making across public and private institutions.

References

1. Grieves, M., & Vickers, J. (2017). Digital twin: Mitigating unpredictable, undesirable emergent behavior in complex systems. In F.-J. Kahlen, S. Flumerfelt, & A. Alves (Eds.), Transdisciplinary perspectives on complex systems (pp. 85–113). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38756-7_4

2. Tao, F., Zhang, H., Liu, A., & Nee, A. Y. C. (2019). Digital twin in industry: State-of-the-art. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 15(4), 2405–2415. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2018.2873186

3. LeBaron, B. (2006). Agent-based computational finance. In L. Tesfatsion & K. L. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of computational economics (Vol. 2, pp. 1187–1233). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0021(05)02024-1

4. Bonabeau, E. (2002). Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(Suppl 3), 7280–7287. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.082080899

5. Bookstaber, R. (2017). The end of theory: Financial crises, the failure of economics, and the sweep of human interaction. Princeton University Press.

6. Battiston, S., Farmer, J. D., Flache, A., Garlaschelli, D., Haldane, A. G., Heesterbeek, H., Hommes, C., Jaeger, C., May, R., & Scheffer, M. (2016). Complexity theory and financial regulation. Science, 351(6275), 818–819. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad0299

7. Financial Stability Board. (2017). Artificial intelligence and machine learning in financial services: Market developments and financial stability implications. Financial Stability Board.

8. Liu, T. (2026). Trust-Calibrated Multi-Agent Decision Intelligence for Financial Risk Management under Market Regime Shifts. Available at SSRN 7307503.

9. MacKenzie, D. (2018). Material signals: A historical sociology of high-frequency trading. American Journal of Sociology, 123(6), 1635–1673. https://doi.org/10.1086/696442

10. Kirilenko, A., Kyle, A. S., Samadi, M., & Tuzun, T. (2017). The Flash Crash: High-frequency trading in an electronic market. Journal of Finance, 72(3), 967–998. https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12498

11. Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679

12. Barocas, S., Hardt, M., & Narayanan, A. (2019). Fairness and machine learning. fairmlbook.org.

13. Rahwan, I., Cebrian, M., Obradovich, N., Bongard, J., Bonnefon, J.-F., Breazeal, C., Crandall, J. W., Christakis, N. A., Couzin, I. D., Jackson, M. O., Jennings, N. R., Kamar, E., Kloumann, I. M., Larochelle, H., Lazer, D., McElreath, R., Mislove, A., Parkes, D. C., Pentland, A., ... Wellman, M. (2019). Machine behaviour. Nature, 568(7753), 477–486. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1138-y

14. Helbing, D., Frey, B. S., Gigerenzer, G., Hafen, E., Hagner, M., Hofstetter, Y., van den Hoven, J., Zicari, R. V., & Zwitter, A. (2019). Will democracy survive big data and artificial intelligence? In Towards digital enlightenment (pp. 73–98). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90869-4_7

15. Haldane, A. G., & May, R. M. (2011). Systemic risk in banking ecosystems. Nature, 469(7330), 351–355. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09659

16. Glasserman, P., & Young, H. P. (2016). Contagion in financial networks. Journal of Economic Literature, 54(3), 779–831. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20151228

17. Gorton, G. B., & Metrick, A. (2012). Securitized banking and the run on repo. Journal of Financial Economics, 104(3), 425–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.03.016

18. Sornette, D. (2003). Why stock markets crash: Critical events in complex financial systems. Princeton University Press.

19. Kitchin, R. (2014). The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences. Sage.

20. Floridi, L. (2014). The Fourth Revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford University Press.

Downloads

Published

2026-08-21

How to Cite

Luigina Sagese, & Candelario Caballero. (2026). Digital Twin-Based Simulation for Multi-Agent Financial Risk Decision Making. Global Financial Analytics Research Review, 1(1). Retrieved from https://www.gfarr.org/index.php/home/article/view/155