The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CRASHES AS CRITICAL POINTS
Abstract
We study a rational expectation model of bubbles and crashes. The model has two components: (1) our key assumption is that a crash may be caused by local self-reinforcing imitation between noise traders. If the tendency for noise traders to imitate their nearest neighbors increases up to a certain point called the "critical" point, all noise traders may place the same order (sell) at the same time, thus causing a crash. The interplay between the progressive strengthening of imitation and the ubiquity of noise is characterized by the hazard rate, i.e. the probability per unit time that the crash will happen in the next instant if it has not happened yet. (2) Since the crash is not a certain deterministic outcome of the bubble, it remains rational for traders to remain invested provided they are compensated by a higher rate of growth of the bubble for taking the risk of a crash. Our model distinguishes between the end of the bubble and the time of the crash: the rational expectation constraint has the specific implication that the date of the crash must be random. The theoretical death of the bubble is not the time of the crash because the crash could happen at any time before, even though this is not very likely. The death of the bubble is the most probable time for the crash. There also exists a finite probability of attaining the end of the bubble without crash. Our model has specific predictions about the presence of certain critical log-periodic patterns in pre-crash prices, associated with the deterministic components of the bubble mechanism. We provide empirical evidence showing that these patterns were indeed present before the crashes of 1929, 1962 and 1987 on Wall Street and the 1997 crash on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. These results are compared with statistical tests on synthetic data.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work
Fama, E. F. (1970) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.2307/2325486 · Cited by 13,635
FAMA, E. F. (1991) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb04636.x · Cited by 5,350
Wu, F. Y. (1982) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.54.235 · Cited by 3,570
Simple technical trading rules and the stochastic properties of stock returns
BROCK, W., LAKONISHOK, J., & LeBARON, B. (1992) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1992.tb04681.x · Cited by 2,301
Cited by
Discrete hierarchical organization of social group sizes
Zhou, W.-X., Sornette, D., Hill, R. A., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2005) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2970 · Cited by 574
Self-citationWhy Stock Markets Crash: Critical Events in Complex Financial Systems
Sornette, D. (2009) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400829552 · Cited by 322
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- JOHANSEN, A., LEDOIT, O., & SORNETTE, D.
- Venue
- International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance
- Publisher
- World Scientific Pub Co Pte Lt
- Published
- 2000-04
- Volume
- 03
- Issue
- 02
- Pages
- 219-255
- ISSN
- 0219-0249 (ISSN-L)
- 1793-6322
- OpenAlex
- W2100381995
- Cited by
- 524
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 29.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CRASHES AS CRITICAL POINTS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1142/s0219024900000115
- The paper
- JOHANSEN, A., LEDOIT, O., & SORNETTE, D. (2000). CRASHES AS CRITICAL POINTS. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219024900000115
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.