DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:1802.09159V1 [Cs.AI] 26 Feb 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:1802.09159V1 [Cs.AI] 26 Feb 2018 Antifragility for Intelligent Autonomous Systems Anusha Mujumdar, Swarup Kumar Mohalik, Ramamurthy Badrinath Ericsson Research, Bangalore anusha.pradeep.mujumdar, swarup.kumar.mohalik,[email protected] Abstract due to which there are no concrete guidelines for design- ing an antifragile system. In this paper, we address this gap Antifragile systems grow measurably better in the by formalizing the notions of fragility, robustness, resilience presence of hazards. This is in contrast to fragile and antifragility in the context of intelligent systems, in par- systems which break down in the presence of haz- ticular, for a large subclass of systems that are based upon ards, robust systems that tolerate hazards up to a knowledge-based reasoning and AI planning. We show that certain degree, and resilient systems that – like self- antifragile intelligent systems can be designed using a refine- healing systems – revert to their earlier expected ment of MAPE-K (Monitor, Analyse, Planning and Execu- behavior after a period of convalescence. The no- tion - Knowledge), the autonomic architecture suggested by tion of antifragility was introduced by Taleb for IBM [IBM, 2005]. economics systems, but its applicability has been The paper is organized as follows. We briefly review some illustrated in biological and engineering domains background work on antifragility in section 2. Section 3 lays as well. In this paper, we propose an architecture out the scope of the current study, and describes our approach that imparts antifragility to intelligent autonomous towards introducing antifragility concepts into intelligent sys- systems, specifically those that are goal-driven and tems. Section 4 details the intelligent systems model fol- based on AI-planning. We argue that this architec- lowed, and formalizes concepts of fragility and antifragilil- ture allows the system to self-improve by uncov- ity in such systems. Section 5 proposes design modules for ering new capabilities obtained either through the antifragility, to be augmented to an existing autonomic com- hazards themselves (opportunistic) or through de- puting architecture of intelligent systems. In section 6, we liberation (strategic). An AI planning-based case illustrate the developed concepts with the help of a robot path study of an autonomous wheeled robot is presented. planning example. We conclude in section 7 with some future We show that with the proposed architecture, the directions. robot develops antifragile behaviour with respect to an oil spill hazard. 2 Related Work Systems that degrade in behavior when acted upon by exter- 1 Introduction nal hazards (or, stressors) are known as fragile systems. Ro- How should an intelligent, autonomous system adapt to un- bust systems display tolerance to hazards upto a certain pre- foreseen situations? Answering this question has been the designed level, and show no change in performance. If the focus of significant research effort over the last two decades magnitude of the hazard exceeds this level, system perfor- [Hayes-Roth, 1995]. However, the notion of adaptivity has mance rapidly degrades. An example of a robust system is arXiv:1802.09159v1 [cs.AI] 26 Feb 2018 so far been limited to a system’s capability to cope with un- a building designed to withstand an earthquake of a particu- known situations and return, at best to its original perfor- lar magnitude. Resilient systems are affected by hazards, but mance. In this work, we argue that the presence of unforeseen return to normal performance after a hiatus. Robust and re- stressors, or hazards, offers a system an opportunity to self- silient systems have been studied extensively as a means to improve. Such self-improvement in the presence of hazards allow intelligent systems to cope with hazards [Russell et al., is the central notion of antifragility. 2015]; however, in such systems, the performance, at best, The term antifragility was coined by Nicholas Taleb in his retains its original behavior. book [Taleb, 2012], in which he argued that the opposites of Taleb notes that certain systems, in fact, benefit from the fragile systems are not robust or resilient systems, but sys- presence of hazards, and that these systems need to be distin- tems that benefit from hazards and grow stronger as a result. guished from being merely robust or resilient. Such systems These concepts and their relationships are compelling and abound in nature e.g., the immune system strengthens itself have been illustrated in many domains such as economics, bi- upon encounter with an antigen and often retains the devel- ology and engineering. However, the literature does not pro- oped coping capability permanently [Monperrus, 2017]. An- vide any suggestion towards formalization of the concepts, other example is muscular strength being developed by the stressor of exercise [Jones, 2014]. The increase in strength so strength with available plans and take a position that a sys- developed improves the capability of the muscle to perform a tem is stronger if there are more plans available. This can be wide variety of tasks many of which may be unrelated to the implemented by introducing new actions in the system. As exercise that initially triggered it. In environmental ecosys- a consequence, a system that was fragile w.r.t. some hazards tems [Taleb, 2012], the presence of a hazard in the form of a may now become robust and/or resilient. This is consistent predator strengthens the surviving prey population, since they with the observation in antifragility literature that new capa- learn from past experience. bilities introduce redundancy, which brings beneficial effects Antifragile systems have been studied in the literature through resilience and robustness. in the context of communication systems [Lichtman et al., Modeling the above notion of antifragility in the context of 2016], infrastructure networks [Fang and Sansavini, 2017], intelligent systems has a difficulty. In the antifragility liter- aerospace [Jones, 2014], health care [Clancy, 2015] and ature, new capabilities are introduced through external enti- cloud systems [Johnson and Gheorghe, 2013]. All of these ties (e.g. medicine) or through realization of already existing emphasize the following characteristics of antifragile sys- capabilities (e.g. exercise). However, the intelligent systems tems: that we consider have fixed sets of actions and do not have ac- cess to any external source for new actions1. We ameliorate • Such systems thrive in the presence of hazards, as op- this situation by partitioning the set of actions into visible and posed to robust systems that simply endure, and resilient hidden subsets. At any point of time, the plan synthesis algo- systems which merely survive and return to original per- rithms have access to only the visible subset. Actions can be formance at best. brought in from the hidden set to introduce new actions for • Antifragile systems learn from failure to handle hazards; the planner. One can argue that such an approach is “artifi- the failure may be their own or of other members in a cial” because the system by default has access to all actions, population-based system. which results in the largest set of plans possible. However, our approach is realistic and has a strong rationale: first, due • When acted upon by hazards, the system responds in to the smaller visible set, planning is more efficient. More a fashion that improves its performance over time (not importantly, there is a cost to support the planning and execu- necessarily immediately); the improvement is through tion of actions (more sensors and actuators, more predicates, acquisition of new capabilities caused by deliberate larger state space). Therefore, it is advisable to consider only strategies by the system or through the opportunistic ex- a subset of the actions that are necessary in the current situa- ploitation of certain attributes of the hazard itself. tion and enhance the subset only when in need (e.g. to handle The literature, in general, does not provide formal definitions a hazard). This is accurately captured by the partition of the of the concepts of fragility, robustness, resilience and an- actions into visible and hidden sets. tifragility. In [Lichtman et al., 2016], antifragility is demon- An antifragile intelligent system must therefore first decide strated mathematically for a particular hazard in a communi- what actions are made visible, when and for what duration, cation system, but the definitions are specific to the problem and then execute these decisions. We show that by suitable and are not generic enough to be applicable to other systems. refinement of the MAPE-K loop mentioned in the introduc- tion, with refined action sets and appropriate modules, one 3 Our Scope and Approach can obtain an architecture to design intelligent systems that exhibit antifragility. In the rest of this section, we give some In this paper, we wish to formalize the concepts of an- details of the base MAPE-K loop. tifragility in the context of intelligent systems. Specifically, Intelligent systems based on AI planning can be imple- we consider the class of systems that are goal-driven and mented using the MAPE-K loop (see Fig. 2). It comprises the based on AI planning. These systems have a fixed set of ac- Monitor, Analyzer, Planner, Executor and Knowledge mod- tions. Given goals and constraints, they attempt to achieve the ules orchestrated in a loop by the Autonomic Manager. The goals by deriving a sequence (called plan) from the available Monitor module is responsible for gathering relevant state in- actions and then executing the plan. formation from the resources to detect the events of inter- An intelligent system can be fragile because hazards en- est. This information is then used by the Analysis module countered during execution may drive the system to states to determine if there is a need to change the current plan (se- from where it cannot find a plan to achieve its goals. If, on quence of actions) which is being executed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Antifragile Mindset Why Resilience Isn't Enough in the Face of a Global Pandemic
    The Antifragile Mindset Why resilience isn't enough in the face of a global pandemic. by Dana Klisanin, Ph.D. Source: Dana Klisanin If COVID-19 hadn’t cancelled travel around the world, I’d be headed to London to speak about a topic that has become increasingly timely – antifragility – a powerful concept introduced by author Nassim Nicolas Taleb in his book, Antifragile: Things that Gain From Disorder. In a nutshell, antifragility means to get stronger in the face of stressors. Taleb explains: “Some things benefit from shocks; they thrive and grow when exposed to volatility, randomness, disorder, and stressors and love adventure, risk, and uncertainty. Yet, in spite of the ubiquity of the phenomenon, there is no word for the exact opposite of fragile. Let us call it antifragile. Antifragility is beyond resilience or robustness. The resilient resists shocks and stays the same; the antifragile gets better.” Right now, the pandemic is wreaking havoc on our systems – collective systems and personal routines are undergoing major shocks. Many of us are experiencing personal and collective anxiety, as well as an increase in stress, depression, feelings of hopelessness, panic, and grief. These feelings are normal responses to trauma of this magnitude. But it is important to recognize that we don't have to give in to such feelings. We have a choice. At this crucial moment of systemic stress, we can choose to develop an antifragile mindset and grow stronger. Source: Photo by Vicky Sim on Unsplash Developing an antifragile mindset doesn't mean denying feelings of anxiety and stress, but instead, training ourselves to summon the opposite responses.
    [Show full text]
  • Building and Sustaining Antifragile Teams
    Audrey Boydston Dave Saboe Building and Sustaining Antifragile Teams “Some things benefit from shocks; they thrive and grow when exposed to volatility, randomness, disorder, and stressors and love adventure, risk, and uncertainty.” Nassim Nicholas Taleb FRAGILE: Team falls apart under stress and volatility ROBUST: Team is not harmed by stress and volatility ANTIFRAGILE: Team grows stronger as a result of stress and volatility “Antifragility is beyond resilience or robustness. The resilient resists shocks and stays the same; the antifragile gets better” - Nassim Nicholas Taleb Why Antifragility? Benefit from risk Adaptability and uncertainty Better outcomes Growth of people More innovation Can lead to antifragile code Where does your team fit? Fragile Robust Antifragile Prerequisites for Antifragility Psychological Safety What does safety sound like? Create a safe environment Accountability Honesty Healthy Conflict Respect Open Communication Safety and Trust Responsibility Radical Antifragile Candor Challenge Each Other Love Actively Seek Differing Views Growth Mindset Building Antifragile Teams Getting from Here to There Fragile Robust Antifragile “The absence of challenge degrades the best of the best” - Nassim Nicholas Taleb Fragile The Rise and Fall of Antifragile Teams Antifragile Robust Eustress Learning Mindset Just enough stressors + recovery time Stress + Rest = Antifragile Take Accountability I will . So that . What you can do Change your questions Introduce eustress + rest Innovate Building and Sustaining Antifragile Teams Audrey Boydston @Agile_Audrey Dave Saboe @MasteringBA.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Antifragile Software Architectures
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Procedia Computer Science 00 (2016) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia 4th International Workshop on Computational Antifragility and Antifragile Engineering (ANTIFRAGILE 2017) Towards Antifragile Software Architectures Daniel Russoa,b,c,∗, Paolo Ciancarinia,b,c aDepartment of Computer Science & Engineering - University of Bologna, Mura Anteo Zamboni 7, 40126 Bologna, Italy bConsiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies cConsorzio Interuniversitario Nazionale per l’Informatica (CINI) Abstract Antifragility is a rising issue in Software Engineering. Due to pervasiveness of software in a growing number of mission critical applications, traditional resilience and recovery systems may not be sufficient. Software has taken over many functionalities which are of vital interest in today and future world. We relay a lot on software applications which may be faulty and cause immense damages. To cope with this scenario, claiming to develop better software is not enough, since unexpected events a.k.a. Black Swans, may disrupt and overcome our system. The purpose of this paper is to propose a new architectural design that responds to the need to build antifragile systems for contemporary complex scenarios. We suggest a system which enhances its strength through experience and errors. It is a self adaptive system architecture improving when facing errors. The most relevant aspect of this approach is that architectures are not only resilient, they extract the intrinsic value of faults. This paper suggests that a fine grained architecture is the key issue to build antifragile systems. c 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of the Conference Program Chairs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Unconstrained Vision of Nassim Taleb
    The Unconstrained Vision of Nassim Taleb F RYAN H. MURPHY assim Taleb has risen in the past decade to become an authority on the intersection of finance, statistics, and epistemology, popularizing insights N regarding fat tails and true uncertainty. While he has brought attention to many worthy concepts poorly understood by the public, his recent work under- scores an important tension within his thought. Though Taleb claims to champion the superiority of traditional institutions over the rationalism and expertise of social engineers, his arguments and conclusions betray a supreme confidence in his own ability to rationally evaluate which traditions are beneficial. In contrast to many thinkers who see the institutions and practices of modern civilization as outcomes of evolutionary processes, Taleb is a social engineer who endorses radical change, although those radical changes involve a return to institutions and practices of years past. Most recently, his 2012 book Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder follows the ideas of the earlier publication The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable (2007), and its extensions are apparent. The Black Swan challenged readers to consider unpredictable events that fall outside the formal models of aca- demics, especially economists. A theory may always seem right—but only until it isn’t; the eponymous black swan falsified the long-standing theory that all swans are white. Similarly, theories that data told us perform well may suddenly cease describing reality, just as a financial model may cause a naive investor to lose his shirt. Ryan H. Murphy is a research associate at the O’Neil Center for Global Markets and Freedom in the Southern Methodist University Cox School of Business.
    [Show full text]
  • Antifragile-How-To-Live-In-A-World-We-Dont-Understand
    blo gs.lse.ac.uk http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2013/02/23/book-review-antifragile-how-to-live-in-a-world-we-dont-understand/ Book Review: Antifragile: How to Live in a World We Don’t Understand by Blog Admin February 23, 2013 In The Black Swan, Nassim Nicholas Taleb wrote on the highly improbable and unpredictable events that underlie almost everything about our world. In Antifragile, Taleb aims to stand uncertainty on its head, making it desirable, even necessary. Steve Fuller comments on the applicability of Taleb’s work to academia and discusses just how ‘fragile’ the academic way of being has become. Antifragile: How to Live in a World We Don’t Understand. Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Allen Lane. November 2012. Find this book: Antifragile is the most inspiring work that I have read in a long time. It provides a comprehensive rational basis f or the Nietzschean maxim, ‘What doesn’t kill me makes me stronger’, which is the essence of the ‘antif ragile’ world-view. Taleb generalises the lesson that he f irst taught concerning ‘black swans’, namely, those highly improbable events that when they happen end up producing a step change in the course of history. Taleb’s deep insight involved a radical dismissal of those who claim in retrospect that they nearly predicted such events and think they ‘learn’ by improving their capacity to predict ‘similar events’ in the f uture. Such people, who constitute an unhealthy proportion of pundits in the f inancial sector (but also a large part of the social science community), are captive to a hindsight illusion that leads them to conf use explanation with prediction.
    [Show full text]
  • Talebdouady Version 11
    Taleb Douady 1 Mathematical Definition, Mapping, and Detection of (Anti)Fragility N. N. Taleb NYU-Poly R Douady CNRS- Risk Data First Version, August 2012 Abstract We provide a mathematical definition of fragility and antifragility as negative or positive sensitivity to a semi-measure of dispersion and volatility (a variant of negative or positive “vega”) and examine the link to nonlinear effects. We integrate model error (and biases) into the fragile or antifragile context. Unlike risk, which is linked to psychological notions such as subjective preferences (hence cannot apply to a coffee cup) we offer a measure that is universal and concerns any object that has a probability distribution (whether such distribution is known or, critically, unknown). We propose a detection of fragility, robustness, and antifragility using a single “fast-and-frugal”, model-free, probability free heuristic that also picks up exposure to model error. The heuristic lends itself to immediate implementation, and uncovers hidden risks related to company size, forecasting problems, and bank tail exposures (it explains the forecasting biases). While simple to implement, it outperforms stress testing and other such methods such as Value-at-Risk. What is Fragility? The notions of fragility and antifragility were introduced in Taleb(2011,2012). In short, fragility is related to how a system suffers from the variability of its environment beyond a certain preset threshold (when threshold is K, it is called K-fragility), while antifragility refers to when it benefits from this variability —in a similar way to “vega” of an option or a nonlinear payoff, that is, its sensitivity to volatility or some similar measure of scale of a distribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Besprekingsartikel – Review Article the Black Swan and the Owl Of
    Historia 59, 2, November 2014, pp 369-387 Besprekingsartikel – Review Article Nassim Nicholas Taleb, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable Penguin, London, Second edition, 2010 xxxii, 444 pp ISBN 978-0-1410-3459-1 R233.00 Price The Black Swan and the owl of Minerva: Nassim Nicholas Taleb and the historians Bruce S. Bennett Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s The Black Swan,1 and some of his other writings, put forward ideas on history. The book is unusual since it is neither a normal academic work nor a popularisation but an attempt to do both at once.2 The book’s subtitle is The Impact of the Highly Improbable. It is a wide-ranging work, more a collection of essays than a unity, and something of a personal manifesto on his view of life as well as an argument. The basic idea is that highly improbable events have a disproportionate influence in life, and that it is dangerously misleading to treat them as exceptions which can be ignored. Taleb refers to his improbable events as Black Swans. The name comes from an ancient Latin idiom for something fantastically rare, based on the fact that all European swans are white. 3 The metaphor is also used in discussing the philosophical problem of induction, but that is not relevant to Taleb’s sense. A Black Swan has three attributes. Firstly, rarity: it is an “outlier”, something way outside the normal range. Secondly, “extreme impact” in terms of its effect on human events. Thirdly, “despite its outlier status, human nature makes us concoct explanations for its occurrence after the fact, making it explainable and predictable”.4 It is naive, in Taleb’s view, to attempt to predict such events.
    [Show full text]
  • A Political Economy of Nassim Nicholas Taleb
    The Red Swan Rob Wallace The Red Swan A political economy of Nassim Nicholas Taleb 1 farmingpathogens.wordpress.com An e-single by Rob Wallace farmingpathogens.wordpress.com The Red Swan Rob Wallace ‘Why didn’t you walk around the hole?’ asked the Tin Woodman. ‘I don’t know enough,’ replied the Scarecrow, cheerfully. ‘My head is stuffed with straw, you know, and that is why I am going to Oz to ask him for some brains.’ –L. Frank Baum (1900) She didn’t know what he knew, what she could take for granted: she tried, once, referring to Nabokov’s doomed chess-player Luzhin, who came to feel that in life as in chess there were certain combinations that would inevitably arise to defeat him, as a way of explaining by analogy her own (in fact somewhat different) sense of impending catastrophe (which had to do not with recurring patterns but with the inescapability of the unforeseeable)... –Salman Rushdie (1989) ERHAPS BY CHANCE ALONE Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s best-selling The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable , followed now by the just released Antifragile, captures the P zeitgeist of 9/11 and the foreclosure collapse: If something of a paradox, bad things unexpectedly happen routinely. For better and for worse, Black Swan caustically critiques academic economics, which serve, more I must admit in my view than Taleb’s, as capitalist rationalization rather than as a science of discovery. Taleb crushes mainstream quantitative finance, but fails as spectacularly on a number of accounts. To the powerful’s advantage, at one and the same time he mathematicizes Francis Fukuyama’s end of history and claims epistemological impossibilities where others, who have been systemically marginalized, predicted precisely to radio silence.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Antifragile Software
    Principles of Antifragile Software Martin Monperrus University of Lille & Inria, France [email protected] January 27, 2017 Abstract reliability. The notion of “antifragility” comes from the There are many software engineering concepts book by Nassim Nicholas Taleb simply entitled and techniques related to software errors. But “Antifragile” [14]. Antifragility is a property of is this enough? Have we already completely ex- systems, whether natural or artificial: a system plored the software engineering noosphere with is antifragile if it thrives and improves when fac- respect to errors and reliability? In this paper, ing errors. Taleb has a broad definition of “error”: I discuss an novel concept, called “software an- it can be volatility (e.g. for financial systems), tifragility”, that is unconventional and has the attacks and shocks (e.g. for immune systems), capacity to improve the way we engineer errors death (e.g. for human systems), etc. Yet, Taleb’s and dependability in a disruptive manner. This essay is not at all about engineering, and it re- paper first discusses the foundations of software mains to translate the power and breadth of his antifragilty, from classical fault tolerance to the vision into a set of sound engineering principles. most recent advances on automatic software re- This paper provides a first step in this direction pair and fault injection in production. This pa- and discusses the relations between traditional per then explores the relation between the an- software engineering concepts and antifragility. tifragility of the development process and the First, I relate software antifragility to classi- antifragility of the resulting software product.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Antifragile Software
    Principles of Antifragile Software Martin Monperrus June 7, 2017 Abstract whether natural or artificial: a system is antifragile if it thrives and improves when facing errors. Taleb has There are many software engineering concepts and a broad definition of “error”: it can be volatility (e.g. techniques related to software errors. But is this for financial systems), attacks and shocks (e.g. for enough? Have we already completely explored the immune systems), death (e.g. for human systems), software engineering noosphere with respect to er- etc. Yet, Taleb’s essay is not at all about engineering, rors and reliability? In this paper, I discuss an novel and it remains to translate the power and breadth of concept, called “software antifragility”, that is uncon- his vision into a set of sound engineering principles. ventional and has the capacity to improve the way This paper provides a first step in this direction and we engineer errors and dependability in a disruptive discusses the relations between traditional software manner. This paper first discusses the foundations engineering concepts and antifragility. of software antifragilty, from classical fault tolerance First, I relate software antifragility to classical to the most recent advances on automatic software fault tolerance. Second, I show the link between an- repair and fault injection in production. This paper tifragility and the most recent advances on automatic then explores the relation between the antifragility of software repair and failure injection. Third, I explore the development process and the antifragility of the the relation between the antifragility of the devel- resulting software product. opment process and the antifragility of the resulting software product.
    [Show full text]
  • Complex Systems
    Presented at the Baylor Libraries Symposium, “Understanding Media”, Waco, TX, Sep 25-26, 2014. Complex Systems Dr. Paul C. Grabow Baylor University There are many kinds of complex systems. Some involve primarily machinery – your car or jet airplanes, with multiple electronic subsystems – but oftentimes complex systems directly involve people, such as the air transportation system, economic systems, or political systems. Consequently, there are many ways to define complex systems because complexity has always been in the eye of the beholder. Since complex is a common adjective, the term has conventional meaning and should really not be coopted by science. However, we must recognize that there are formal, scientific definitions used by scholarly journals and conferences – and there is even a Ph.D. in complex systems. Here, however, we will use an informal approach and will focus on our ability – or inability – to understand and control these systems. But first we should start with Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980) and George Grant (1918- 1988), contemporaries who both refer (directly or indirectly) to complex systems. In Understanding Media McLuhan uses a version of “complex” 52 times – not a lot for 392 pages – and the only time that he specifically refers to a complex system it is in the following: “Words are complex systems of metaphors and symbols…” (McLuhan 873)1. He also claims that “fragmented Western man” is being transformed “into a complex and depth-structured person emotionally aware of his total interdependence with the rest of human society” (785) via electric technology. This is in concert with his claim that humans are undergoing an “extension of consciousness” – where “all technologies are extensions of our physical being” (2599, 2659, 2745) and in his reference to “the electronic world of the seamless web of events” (3046).
    [Show full text]
  • 513-515 Holtfort Krajewski 513..515
    AGENDA » Behavioral Finance Black swans, antifragility and pattern recognition at the German stock market vonProf. Dr.Thomas Holtfort | Prof. Dr. Jarek Krajewski " CF0676463 » Executive Summary » AUTOREN Prof. Dr.T. Holtfort | Prof. Dr. J. Krajewski » Die Studie beschftigt sich mit der Relevanz von Schwarzen Schwnen Prof. Dr. Thomas Holtfort, Professur fr Finanz- und Wirtschafts- im Zeitraum November 1990 bis Juni 2014 fr den deutschen Aktien- psychologie/Verhaltensçkonomie, FOM Hochschule. markt, um einerseits deutlich zu machen, dass solche Extremereignis- Prof. Dr. Jarek Krajewski, Experimentelle Wirtschaftspsychologie, Ber- se hufiger vorkommen als es nach der Normalverteilung zu erwarten gische Universitt Wuppertal und Wirtschaftspsychologie, Rheinische wre und andererseits Handlungsempfehlungen abzuleiten. Die Ergeb- Fachhochschule Kçln. nisse belegen den Einfluss von Schwarzen Schwnen, wonach allein in den letzten 24 Jahren fnf Ereignisse zu einer Renditeabweichung von mindestens vier Standardabweichungen gefhrt haben. concept of fragility is also directly related to causality, since it is not linear or causal (Fig. 1) but much more vulnerable to » The study deals with the relevance of Black Swans at the German extreme events than by a sequence of average incidents 5. stock market for the period from November 1990 to June 2014, to decide to what extent very negative yield deviations occur more frequently than would be expected for a normal distribution and to ([WHQWRI derivate recommendations for investors. The analyzes show that the WKHHYHQW negative impact of Black Swans is given clearly, according to five events which have led to a daily loss of more than four standard devia- tions only in the last 24 years. %ODFN6ZDQ I. Introduction Today’s view of the capital markets has changed since at least the scientific knowledge and new approaches of Nassim Taleb 1.
    [Show full text]