=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2546/paper05
|storemode=property
|title=Comparative analysis of the cryptocurrency and the stock markets using the Random Matrix Theory
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2546/paper05.pdf
|volume=Vol-2546
|authors=Vladimir N. Soloviev,Symon P. Yevtushenko,Viktor V. Batareyev
}}
==Comparative analysis of the cryptocurrency and the stock markets using the Random Matrix Theory==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2546/paper05.pdf
87
Comparative analysis of the cryptocurrency and the stock
markets using the Random Matrix Theory
Vladimir N. Soloviev1,2[000-0002-4945-202X], Symon P. Yevtushenko2
1 Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University, 54, Gagarina Ave, Kryvyi Rih 50086, Ukraine
2 Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University of Cherkasy, 81, Shevchenko Blvd., Cherkasy,
18031, Ukraine
{vnsoloviev2016, sivam.evt}@gmail.com
Viktor V. Batareyev
Kryvyi Rih Metallurgical Institute of the National Metallurgical Academy of Ukraine,
5, Stepana Tilhy Str., Kryvyi Rih, 50006, Ukraine
viktor_bat@ukr.net
Abstract. This article demonstrates the comparative possibility of constructing
indicators of critical and crash phenomena in the volatile market of
cryptocurrency and developed stock market. Then, combining the empirical
cross-correlation matrix with the Random Matrix Theory, we mainly examine the
statistical properties of cross-correlation coefficients, the evolution of the
distribution of eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors in both markets using
the daily returns of price time series. The result has indicated that the largest
eigenvalue reflects a collective effect of the whole market, and is very sensitive
to the crash phenomena. It has been shown that introduced the largest eigenvalue
of the matrix of correlations can act like indicators-predictors of falls in both
markets.
Keywords: stock market, cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, complex system, measures
of complexity, crash, Random Matrix Theory, indicator-precursor.
1 Introduction
The instability of global financial systems with regard to normal and natural
disturbances of the modern market and the presence of poorly foreseeable financial
crashes indicate, first of all, the crisis of the methodology of modeling, forecasting and
interpretation of modern socio-economic realities. The modern paradigm of synergetic
is a complex paradigm associated with the possibility of direct numerical simulation of
the processes of complex systems evolution [1; 11; 20; 19; 28].
Complex systems are systems consisting of a plurality of interacting agents
possessing the ability to generate new qualities at the level of macroscopic collective
behavior, the manifestation of which is the spontaneous formation of noticeable
temporal, spatial, or functional structures. As simulation processes, the application of
___________________
Copyright © 2019 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
88
quantitative methods involves measurement procedures, where importance is given to
complexity measures. I. Prigogine notes that the concepts of simplicity and complexity
are relativized in the pluralism of the descriptions of languages, which also determines
the plurality of approaches to the quantitative description of the complexity
phenomenon [21]. Therefore, we will continue to study Prigogine’s manifestations of
the system complexity, using the current methods of quantitative analysis to determine
the appropriate measures of complexity.
The key idea here is the hypothesis that the complexity of the system before the
crashes and the actual periods of crashes must change. This should signal the
corresponding degree of complexity if they are able to quantify certain patterns of a
complex system. Significant advantage of the introduced measures is their dynamism,
that is, the ability to monitor the change in time of the chosen measure and compare it
with the corresponding dynamics of the output time series. This allowed us to compare
the critical changes in the dynamics of the system, which is described by the time series,
with the characteristic changes of concrete measures of complexity. It turned out that
quantitative measures of complexity respond to critical changes in the dynamics of a
complex system, which allows them to be used in the diagnostic process and prediction
of future changes.
Cryptocurrency market is a complex, self-organized system, which in most cases can
be considered either as a complex network of market agents, or as an integrated output
signal of such a network – a time series, for example, prices of individual
cryptocurrency. Thus the cryptocurrency prices exhibit such complex volatility
characteristics as nonlinearity and uncertainty, which are difficult to forecast and any
results obtained are uncertain. Therefore, cryptocurrency price prediction remains a
huge challenge.
The stock market is one of the more developed economic segments of the financial
market, highly capitalized and globalized with well-studied trends. Therefore, a
comparative analysis of fragments of these markets is of obvious scientific and applied
interest.
Unfortunately, the existing nowadays classical econometric [5; 8; 34] and modern
methods of prediction of crisis phenomena based on machine learning methods [2; 3;
7; 10; 13; 14; 15; 25; 36] do not have sufficient accuracy and reliability of prediction.
Thus, lack of reliable models of prediction of time series for the time being will
update the construction of at least indicators which warn against possible critical
phenomena or trade changes etc. In our previous works, we constructed some indicators
of crisis phenomena using the methods of nonlinear dynamics [276; 27] and the theory
of complex networks [31]. Similar approaches, like the Random Matrix Theory, are
developed in the framework of interdisciplinary science, called econophysics [17; 24].
This work is dedicated to the construction of such indicators – precursors based on the
Random Matrix Theory.
The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 describes previous studies in these
fields. Section 3 presents classification of crashes and critical events on the example of
a key cryptocurrency Bitcoin during the entire period (16.07.2010 – 10.01.2019) and
stock market by the example of the index S&P 500 during the entire period (17.03.1980
89
– 10.01.2019). In Section 4, new indicators of critical and crash phenomena are
introduced using the Random Matrix Theory.
2 Analysis of previous studies
Random Matrix Theory (RMT) developed in this context the energy levels of complex
nuclei, which the existing models failed to explain [9; 16; 18; 37]. Deviations from the
universal predictions of RMT identify system specific, nonrandom properties of the
system under consideration, providing clues about the underlying interactions.
Unlike most physical systems, where one relates correlations between subunits to
basic interactions, the underlying “interactions” for the financial systems problem are
not known. Here, we analyze cross correlations between financial agents (stocks,
cryptocurrencies) by applying concepts and methods of RMT, developed in the context
of complex quantum systems. Wherein the precise nature of the interactions between
subunits are not known.
RMT has been applied extensively in studying multiple financial time series among
which stock markets are central [12; 22; 23; 26; 35]. The first fundamental work in the
field of modelling self-organization processes in the US stock market after the S&P 500
index using the RMT method was the study of [23]. Using extensive databases (every
minute, hourly, daily), an analysis of their correlation properties is carried out. It is
shown that there is a small part of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors containing
important information about the structural and dynamic properties of the market. In
particular, the authors of [23] found that the largest eigenvalue corresponds to an
influence common to all stocks. Analysis of the remaining deviating eigenvectors
shows distinct groups, whose identities correspond to conventionally identified
business sectors. Finally, the authors discuss applications to the construction of
portfolios of stocks that have a stable ratio of risk to return. Further studies, for example,
[12; 22; 26; 35] developed the work of [23] and adapted the methodology to other
financial objects.
As for the cryptocurrency market, the work here has just begun [3332; 33]. In the
work [33], the classic scheme [23] was used for crypto assets with similar conclusions.
The authors [32] analyzed the structure of the cryptocurrency market based on the
correlation-based agglomerative hierarchical clustering and minimum spanning tree
and examined the market structures. As a result, the authors demonstrated the
leadership of the Bitcoin and Ethereum in the market, six homogeneous clusters
composed of relatively less-traded cryptocurrencies, and transformation of the market
structure after the announcement of regulations from various countries.
We will calculate the correlation properties of stock and crypto markets and compare
the calculation results.
3 Data
At the moment, there are various research works on what crises and crashes are and
how to classify such interruptions in the stock markets and market of cryptocurrencies.
90
We have created our classification of such leaps and falls, relying on Bitcoin time series
during the entire period (16.07.2010 – 10.01.2019) of verifiable fixed daily values of
the Bitcoin price (BTC) (https://finance.yahoo.com/cryptocurrencies). Critical US
stock market events considered over time period 17.03.1980 – 10.01.2019
(https://finance.yahoo.com/quote /^GSPC?p=^GSPC).
Critical events are those falls that could go on for a long period of time, and at the
same time, they were not caused by a bubble. The bubble is an increasing in the price
of the cryptocurrencies that could be caused by certain speculative moments. Therefore,
according to our classification of the event with number (1, 3–6, 9–11, 14, 15) are the
crashes that are preceded by the bubbles, all the rest – critical events. More detailed
information about crises, crashes and their classification in accordance with these
definitions is given in the Table 1.
Table 1. List of Bitcoin major corrections ≥ 20% since June 2011
No Name Days in correction
1 07.06.2011 – 10.06.2011 4
2 15.01.2012 – 16.02.2012 33
3 15.08.2012 –18.08.2012 4
4 08.04.2013 –15.04.2013 8
5 04.12.2013 –18.12.2013 15
6 05.02.2014 – 25.02.2014 21
7 12.11.2014 – 14.01.2015 64
8 11.07.2015 – 23.08.2015 44
9 09.11.2015 – 11.11.2015 3
10 18.06.2016 – 21.06.2016 4
11 04.01.2017 – 11.01.2017 8
12 03.03.2017 – 24.03.2017 22
13 10.06.2017 – 15.07.2017 36
14 16.12.2017 – 22.12.2017 7
15 13.11.2018 – 26.11.2018 14
Accordingly, during this period in the Bitcoin market, many crashes and critical
events shook it. Thus, considering them, we emphasize 15 periods on Bitcoin time
series, whose falling we predict by our indicators, relying on normalized returns and
volatility, where normalized returns are calculated as
g (t ) ln X (t t ) ln X (t ) [ X (t t ) X (t )] / X (t ), (1)
and volatility as
1 t n 1
VT (t ) g (t ')
n t 't
(2)
Besides, considering that g(t) should be more than the ±3σ, where σ is a mean square
deviation.
91
A similar procedure makes it possible to present a classification of crashes, crises
and critical events for index S&P 500 with Table 2.
Table 2. List of S&P 500 index historical corrections ≥ 20% since October 1987
No Name Days in correction
1 02.10.1987 – 19.10.1987 12
2 17.07.1990 – 23.08.1990 28
3 01.10.1997 – 21.10.1997 15
4 17.08.1998 – 31.08.1998 11
5 14.08.2002 – 01.10.2002 34
6 16.10.2008 – 15.12.2008 42
7 09.08.2011 – 22.09.2011 32
8 18.08.2015 – 25.08.2015 6
9 29.12.2015 – 20.01.2016 16
10 03.12.2018 – 24.12.2018 15
Calculations were carried out within the framework of the algorithm of a moving
window. For this purpose, the part of the time series (window), for which there were
calculated measures of complexity, was selected, then the window was displaced along
the time series in a one-day increment and the procedure repeated until all the studied
series had exhausted. Further, comparing the dynamics of the actual time series and the
corresponding measures of complexity, we can judge the characteristic changes in the
dynamics of the behavior of complexity with changes in the time series. If this or that
measure of complexity behaves in a definite way for all periods of crashes, for example,
decreases or increases during the pre-crashes period, then it can serve as an indicator or
precursor of such a crashes phenomenon.
Calculations of complexity measures were carried out both for the entire time series,
and for a fragment of the time series localizing the crash. In the latter case, fragments
of time series of the same length with fixed points of the onset of crashes or critical
events were selected and the results of calculations of complexity measures were
compared to verify the universality of the indicators.
In the Figure 1 output Bitcoin time series, normalized returns g(t), and volatility VT(t)
calculated for the window size 100 are presented.
From Figure 1 we can see that during periods of crashes and critical events
normalized profitability g increases considerably in some cases beyond the limits ±3σ.
This indicates about deviation from the normal law of distribution, the presence of the
“heavy tails” in the distribution g, characteristic of abnormal phenomena in the market.
At the same time volatility also grows.
We observe a similar picture for the index S&P 500 (Fig. 2). These characteristics
serve as indicators of critical and collapse phenomena as they react only at the moment
of the above mentioned phenomena and don’t give an opportunity to identify the
corresponding abnormal phenomena in advance. In contrast, the indicators described
below respond to critical and crash phenomena in advance. It enables them to be used
as indicators-precursors of such phenomena and in order to prevent them.
92
Fig. 1. The standardized dynamics, returns g(t), and volatility VT(t) of BTC/USD daily values.
Horizontal dotted lines indicate the ±3σ borders. The arrows indicate the beginning of one of
the crashes or the critical events.
Fig. 2. The standardized dynamics, returns g(t), and volatility VT(t) of S&P 500 daily values.
Horizontal dotted lines indicate the ±3σ borders. The arrows indicate the beginning of one of
the crashes or the critical events.
4 Random Matrix Theory
Special databases have been prepared, consisting of cryptocurrency and S&P 500 index
components time series for a certain period of time. The largest number of
cryptocurrencies 1047 contained a base of 456 days from 31.12.2017 to 10.01.2019,
and the smallest (24 cryptocurrencies) contained a base of 1567 days, respectively, from
93
04.08.2013 to 10.01.2019. For the logarithmic return (1) of the i cryptocurrencies or
stock price we calculate the pairwise cross-correlation coefficients between any two
returns time series. For the largest databases, a graphical representation of the pair
correlation field is shown in the Figure 3a, c. For comparison, a map of correlations of
randomly mixed time series of the same length is shown in Figure 3b, d.
a) b)
c) d)
Fig. 3. Visualization of the field of correlations for the initial (a, c) and mixed (b, d) matrix
cryptocurrency and S&P 500 index respectively. The largest number S&P 500 index
components is 456.
For the correlation matrix C we can calculate its eigenvalues, C U U T , where U
denotes the eigenvectors, is the eigenvalues of the correlation matrix, whose density
fc(λ) is defined as follows, f c ( ) (1/ N )dn( ) / d . n(λ) is the number of eigenvalues
of C that are less than λ. In the limit N , T and Q T / N 1 fixed, the
probability density function fc(λ) of eigenvalues λ of the random correlation matrix M
has a close form [18]:
Q (max )( min )
f c ( ) (3)
2 2
94
max
with [min , max ] , where min max
is given by min 2 (1 1 / Q 2 1 / Q ) and 2 is
equal to the variance of the elements of matrix M [18].
We compute the eigenvalues of the correlation matrix C,
max 1 2 15 min . The probability density functions (pdf) of paired
correlation coefficients cij and eigenvalues λi for matrices of 132, 312, 458
cryptocurrencies and 163, 312, 456 S&P 500 index components are presented in
Figure 4.
a) b)
c) d)
Fig. 4. Comparison of distributions of the pair correlation coefficients (a, c) and eigenvalues of
the correlation matrix (b, d) with those for RMT for cryptocurrency market (a, b) and stock
market (c, d).
Accordingly, for correlation matrices in the case of S&P 500 index, the dimensions of
the matrices are as follows: 163, 312 and 456 (Fig. 4c, d). From Figures 4, it can be
seen that the distribution functions for the paired correlation coefficients of the selected
matrices differ significantly from the distribution function described by the RMT. It
can be seen that the crypto market has a significantly correlated, self-organized system
(Fig. 4a) and the difference from the RMT of the case, the correlation coefficients
exceed the value of 0.6-0.8 on “thick tails”. The distribution of the eigenvalues of the
95
correlation matrix also differs markedly from the case of RMT. In our case, only one-
third of its own values refer to the RMT region. However, the stock market is even
more correlated. On it, the difference with RMT data is even more obvious.
The picture of correlations changes with changing market trends. This is clearly
demonstrated by Figure 5, which shows the window distribution functions of pair
correlation coefficients.
a) b)
Fig. 5. Comparison of the window distributions of the pair correlation coefficients for
cryptocurrencies (a) and S&P 500 index components (b).
And in this case, the stock market is more responsive to changes in market dynamics.
Eigenvectors correspond to the participation ratio PR and its inverse participation
ratio IPR
N 4
I k l 1[ulk ] (4)
,
k
where ul , l 1, . . . , N are the components of the eigenvector uk (Fig. 6a). So PR
indicates the number of eigenvector components that contribute significantly to that
eigenvector. More specifically, a low IPR indicates that they contribute more equally.
In contrast, a large IPR would imply that the factor is driven by the dynamics of a small
number of assets. The irregularity of the influence of the eigenvalues of the correlation
matrix is determined by the absorption ratio (AR), which is a cumulative risk measure
n N
ARn k 1 k / k 1 k (5)
,
and indicates which part of the overall variation is described from the total number N
of eigenvalues.
Figure 6 shows the results of IPR (a, b) calculations for both sets of matrices, as well
as the results in the framework of the algorithm of a moving window, comparative
calculations of the distribution function of eigenvalues (c, d) and IPR (e, f).
96
a) b)
c) d)
e) f)
Fig. 6. Inverse participation ratio (a) and moving window dynamics of the eigenvalues
distribution (b), IPR for the initial and mixed (or random) matrices (c).
The difference in dynamics is due to the peculiarities of non-random correlations
between the time series of individual assets. Under the framework of RMT, if the
eigenvalues of the real time series differ from the prediction of RMT, there must exists
hidden economic information in those deviating eigenvalues. For cryptocurrencies
markets, there are several deviating eigenvalues in which the largest eigenvalue λmax
reflects a collective effect of the whole market. As for PR the differences from RMT
97
appear at large and small λ values and are similar to the Anderson quantum effect of
localization [4]. Under crashes conditions, the states at the edges of the distributions of
eigenvalues are delocalized, thus identifying the beginning of the crash. This is
evidenced by the results presented in Figure 7.
a) b)
Fig. 7. Measures of complexity λmax and its participation ratio. The numerics in the figure
indicate the numbers of crashes and critical events in accordance with the Tables 1, 2.
We find that both λmax and PR λmax have large values for periods containing the market
crashes and critical events. At the same time, their growth begins in the pre-crashes
periods. At the same time, the stock market is more responsive to crisis phenomena.
5 Conclusions
Consequently, in this paper, we have shown that monitoring and prediction of possible
critical changes on both the stock and cryptocurrency markets is of paramount
importance. As it has been shown by us, the theory of complex systems has a powerful
toolkit of methods and models for creating effective indicators-precursors of crashes
and critical phenomena. In this paper, we have explored the possibility of using the
Random Matrix Theory measures of complexity to detect dynamical changes in a
complex time series. We have shown that the measures that have been used can indeed
be effectively used to detect abnormal phenomena for the used time series data.
As it has been shown by us, the econophysics has a powerful toolkit of methods and
models for creating effective indicators-precursors of crisis phenomena. We have
shown that the largest eigenvalue λmax may be effectively used to detect crisis
phenomena for the cryptocurrencies time series. We have concluded though by
emphasizing that the most attractive features of the λmax and PR λmax namely its
conceptual simplicity and computational efficiency make it an excellent candidate for
a fast, robust, and useful screener and detector of unusual patterns in complex time
series.
Thus, the results of this study confirm the main provisions of the concept of early
diagnosis of crisis phenomena by calculating various measures of complexity of
financial systems [6; 27; 29; 30; 31].
98
References
1. Albert, R., Barabási, A.-L.: Statistical Mechanics of Complex Networks. Rev. Mod. Phys.
74, 47–97 (2002). doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.74.47
2. Albuquerque, Y., de Sá, J., Padula, A., Montenegro, M.: The best of two worlds:
Forecasting high frequency volatility for cryptocurrencies and traditional currencies with
Support Vector Regression. Expert Systems With Applications 97, 177–192. (2018)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.12.004
3. Alessandretti, L., ElBahrawy, A., Aiello, L.M., Baronchelli, A.: Machine Learning the
Cryptocurrency Market. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3183792 (2018).
doi:10.2139/ssrn.3183792. Accessed 15 Sep 2018
4. Anderson, P.W.: Absence of Diffusion in Certain Random Lattices. Phys. Rev. 109(5),
1492–1505 (1958). doi:10.1103/PhysRev.109.1492
5. Andrews, B., Calder, M., Davis, R.A.: Maximum Likelihood Estimation for α-Stable
Autoregressive Processes. The Annals of Statistics 37(4), 1946–1982 (2009).
doi:10.1214/08-AOS632
6. Bielinskyi, A., Soloviev, V., Semerikov, S., Solovieva, V.: Detecting Stock Crashes Using
Levy Distribution. In: Kiv, A., Semerikov, S., Soloviev, V., Kibalnyk, L., Danylchuk, H.,
Matviychuk, A. (eds.) Experimental Economics and Machine Learning for Prediction of
Emergent Economy Dynamics, Proceedings of the Selected Papers of the 8th International
Conference on Monitoring, Modeling & Management of Emergent Economy (M3E2 2019),
Odessa, Ukraine, May 22-24, 2019. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 2422, 420–433.
http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2422/paper34.pdf (2019). Accessed 1 Aug 2019
7. Chen, T., Guestrin, C.: XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System. In: KDD '16
Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge
Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, August 13-17, 2016, pp. 785-794 (2016).
doi:10.1145/2939672.2939785
8. Dassios, A., Li, L.: An Economic Bubble Model and Its First Passage Time.
arXiv:1803.08160v1 [q-fin.MF]. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.08160.pdf (2018). Accessed 21
Mar 2019
9. Dyson, F.J.: Statistical Theory of the Energy Levels of Complex Systems. Journal of
Mathematical Physics 3, 140–156 (1962). doi:10.1063/1.1703773
10. Guo, T., Antulov-Fantulin, N.: An experimental study of Bitcoin fluctuation using machine
learning methods. arXiv:1802.04065v2 [stat.ML]. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.04065.pdf
(2018). Accessed 25 Oct 2018
11. Halvin, S., Cohen, R.: Complex networks. Structure, robustness and function. Cambridge
University Press, New York (2010)
12. Jiang, S., Guo, J., Yang, C., Tian, L.: Random Matrix Analysis of Cross-correlation in
Energy Market of Shanxi, China. International Journal of Nonlinear Science 23(2), 96–101.
http://www.internonlinearscience.org/upload/papers/IJNS%20Vol%2023%20%20No%20
2%20Paper%206-%20Random%20Matrix.pdf (2017). Accessed 25 Oct 2019
13. Kennis, M.A.: Multi-channel discourse as an indicator for Bitcoin price and volume
movements. arXiv:1811.03146v1 [q-fin.ST]. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.03146.pdf (2018).
Accessed 25 Oct 2019
14. Kiv, A., Semerikov, S., Soloviev, V., Kibalnyk, L., Danylchuk, H., Matviychuk, A.:
Experimental Economics and Machine Learning for Prediction of Emergent Economy
Dynamics. In: Kiv, A., Semerikov, S., Soloviev, V., Kibalnyk, L., Danylchuk, H.,
Matviychuk, A. (eds.) Experimental Economics and Machine Learning for Prediction of
Emergent Economy Dynamics, Proceedings of the Selected Papers of the 8th International
99
Conference on Monitoring, Modeling & Management of Emergent Economy (M3E2 2019),
Odessa, Ukraine, May 22-24, 2019. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 2422, 1–4. http://ceur-
ws.org/Vol-2422/paper00.pdf (2019). Accessed 1 Aug 2019
15. Kodama, O., Pichl, L., Kaizoji, T.: Regime Change and Trend Prediction for Bitcoin Time
Series Data. In: Hájek P., Vít O., Bašová P., Krijt M., Paszeková H., Součková O., Mudřík
R. (eds.) CBU International Proceedings 2017: Innovations in Science and Education,
Prague, 22–24 March 2017, pp. 384–388. Central Bohemia University Prague (2017).
doi:10.12955/cbup.v5.954
16. Laloux, L., Cizeau, P., Bouchaud, J.-P., Potters, M.: Noise dressing of financial correlation
matrices. Physical Review Letters 83(7), 1467–1470 (1999).
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.1467
17. Mantegna, R.N., Stanley, H.E.: An Introduction to Econophysics: Correlations and
Complexity in Finance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)
18. Mehta, L.M.: Random Matrices, 3rd edn. Academic Press, San Diego (2004)
19. Newman, M., Barabási A.-L., Watts D.J. (eds.): The Structure and Dynamics of Networks.
Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford (2006)
20. Newman, M.E.J.: The Structure and Function of Complex Networks. SIAM Reviews 45(2),
167–256 (2003). doi:10.1137/S003614450342480
21. Nikolis, G., Prigogine, I.: Exploring Complexity: An Introduction. St. Martin’s Press, New
York (1989)
22. Pharasi, H.K., Sharma, K., Chakraborti, A., Seligman, T.H.: Complex Market Dynamics in
the Light of Random Matrix Theory. In: Abergel F., Chakrabarti B., Chakraborti A., Deo
N., Sharma K. (eds.) New Perspectives and Challenges in Econophysics and Sociophysics,
pp. 13–34. New Economic Windows. Springer, Cham (2019). doi:10.1007/978-3-030-
11364-3_2
23. Plerou, V., Gopikrishnan, P., Rosenow, B., Amaral, L.A.N., Guhr, T., Stanley, H.E.:
Random matrix approach to cross correlations in financial data. Phys. Rev. E 65, 066126
(2002)
24. Saptsin, V., Soloviev, V.: Relativistic quantum econophysics – new paradigms in complex
systems modelling. arXiv:0907.1142v1 [physics.soc-ph].
https://arxiv.org/pdf/0907.1142.pdf (2009). Accessed 25 Oct 2019
25. Shah, D., Zhang, K.: Bayesian regression and Bitcoin. In: 2014 52nd Annual Allerton
Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton), Monticello, 30 Sept. –
3 Oct. 2014. IEEE (2014). doi:10.1109/ALLERTON.2014.7028484
26. Shen, J., Zheng, B.: Cross-correlation in financial dynamics. EPL (Europhysics Letters)
86(4), 48005 (2009). doi:10.1209/0295-5075/86/48005
27. Soloviev, V., Belinskij, A.: Methods of nonlinear dynamics and the construction of
cryptocurrency crisis phenomena precursors. In: Ermolayev, V., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C.,
Yakovyna, V., Kharchenko, V., Kobets, V., Kravtsov, H., Peschanenko, V., Prytula, Y.,
Nikitchenko, M., Spivakovsky, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 14th International Conference
on ICT in Education, Research and Industrial Applications. Integration, Harmonization and
Knowledge Transfer. Volume II: Workshops, Kyiv, Ukraine, May 14-17, 2018. CEUR
Workshop Proceedings 2014, 116–127. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2104/paper_175.pdf (2018).
Accessed 25 Oct 2019
28. Soloviev, V., Moiseienko, N., Tarasova, O.: Modeling of cognitive process using
complexity theory methods. In: Ermolayev V., Mallet F., Yakovyna V., Kharchenko V.,
Kobets V., Korniłowicz A., Kravtsov H., Nikitchenko M., Semerikov S., Spivakovsky A.
(eds.) Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on ICT in Education, Research and
Industrial Applications. Integration, Harmonization and Knowledge Transfer. Volume II:
100
Workshops. Kherson, Ukraine, June 12-15, 2019. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 2393,
pp. 905–918. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2393/paper_356.pdf (2019). Accessed 25 Oct 2019
29. Soloviev, V., Serdiuk, O., Semerikov, S., Kohut-Ferens, O.: Recurrence entropy and
financial crashes. In: Horal L., Soloviev V., Matviychuk A., Khvostina I. (eds.).
Proceedings of the 2019 7th International Conference on Modeling, Development and
Strategic Management of Economic System (MDSMES 2019). Advances in Economics,
Business and Management Research, vol. 99, pp. 385–388. Atlantis Press, Paris (2019).
doi:10.2991/mdsmes-19.2019.73
30. Soloviev, V., Solovieva, V., Tuliakova, A., Ivanova, M.: Construction of crisis precursors
in multiplex networks. In: Horal L., Soloviev V., Matviychuk A., Khvostina I. (eds.).
Proceedings of the 2019 7th International Conference on Modeling, Development and
Strategic Management of Economic System (MDSMES 2019). Advances in Economics,
Business and Management Research, vol. 99, pp. 361–366. Atlantis Press, Paris (2019).
doi:10.2991/mdsmes-19.2019.68
31. Soloviev, V.N., Belinskiy, A.: Complex Systems Theory and Crashes of Cryptocurrency
Market. In: Ermolayev V., Suárez-Figueroa M., Yakovyna V., Mayr H., Nikitchenko M.,
Spivakovsky A. (eds.) Information and Communication Technologies in Education,
Research, and Industrial Applications (14th International Conference, ICTERI 2018, Kyiv,
Ukraine, May 14-17, 2018, Revised Selected Papers). Communications in Computer and
Information Science, vol. 1007, pp. 276-297. Springer, Cham (2019). doi:10.1007/978-3-
030-13929-2_14
32. Song J.Y., Chang W., Song J.W.: Cluster analysis on the structure of the cryptocurrency
market via Bitcoin-Ethereum filtering. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its
Applications 527, 121339 (2019). doi:10.1016/j.physa.2019.121339
33. Stosic, Darco, Stosic, Dusan, Ludermir, T.B., Stosic, T.: Collective behavior of
cryptocurrency price changes. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 507,
499–509 (2018). doi:10.1016/j.physa.2018.05.050
34. Tarnopolski, M.: Modeling the price of Bitcoin with geometric fractional Brownian motion:
a Monte Carlo approach. arXiv:1707.03746v3 [q-fin.CP].
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.03746.pdf (2017). Accessed 17 Aug 2019
35. Urama, T.C., Ezepue, P.O., Nnanwa, C.P.: Analysis of Cross-Correlations in Emerging
Markets Using Random Matrix Theory. Journal of Mathematical Finance 7(2), 291–307
(2017). doi:10.4236/jmf.2017.72015
36. Wang, M., Zhao, L., Du, R., Wang, C., Chen, L., Tian, L., Stanley, H.E.: A novel hybrid
method of forecasting crude oil prices using complex network science and artificial
intelligence algorithms. Applied Energy 220, 480–495 (2018).
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.148
37. Wigner, E.P.: On a class of analytic functions from the quantum theory of collisions. Annals
of Mathematics Second Series 53(1), 36–67 (1951). doi:10.2307/1969342