mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

When and How Order-Flow Interventions Work After Dealers Adapt

arXiv 2610.18158 ↗First posted 13 Oct 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Learning dealer agents can settle on persistently wide quotes, raising what customers pay to trade. A venue can route more orders to tighter quotes, but a wide quote may reflect real risk, and once dealers adapt, an end-to-end comparison cannot show why a rule works: because it intervenes more, picks better moments, is announced in advance, or rewards the right quote. We propose SOFA (State-aligned Order-Flow Allocation), a public order-flow contract with three parts: a State Scorer ranks market states from lagged public data, a Commitment Scheduler announces a budgeted intervention strength before dealers quote, and a Quote-to-Flow Allocator shifts a bounded share of fixed customer demand toward tighter quotes. Our paired re-adaptation protocol gives competing rules the same intervention strengths, only re-timed, lets dealers re-adapt to each rule from a shared checkpoint, and breaks one link at a time. Across 20 independently trained dealer populations in an ABIDES market, concentrating the intervention in states that the score ranks as low-risk lowers low-risk execution cost relative to random timing in every population, by 0.040 tick on average, while a stale announcement or a broken quote-to-flow link raises this cost. In the primary setting the gain comes at the expense of high-risk trades, whose costs rise, so state alignment pays off only for a venue that weighs low-risk costs more than 1.38 times as heavily as high-risk costs. Our code is available at https://github.com/moderncavemann/state-aligned-order-flow-contracts.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2026.

Builds on

12 of 33 references.

References · 12

  1. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
  2. 2021The Surprising Effectiveness of PPO in Cooperative, Multi-Agent Gamescited by 942
  3. 2021Deep Reinforcement Learning at the Edge of the Statistical Precipicecited by 807
  4. 2017Deep Reinforcement Learning that Matterscited by 754
  5. 2020Is Independent Learning All You Need in the StarCraft Multi-Agent Challenge?cited by 294
  6. 2020Learning to Incentivize Other Learning Agentscited by 57
  7. 2019Reinforcement Learning for Market Making in a Multi-agent Dealer Marketcited by 39
  8. 2021ABIDES-Gym: Gym Environments for Multi-Agent Discrete Event Simulation and Application to Financial Marketscited by 36
  9. 2020Robust Market Making via Adversarial Reinforcement Learningcited by 14
  10. 2022Learning to Mitigate AI Collusion on Economic Platformscited by 10
  11. 2025Regulation of Algorithmic Collusion, Refined: Testing Pessimistic Calibrated Regretcited by 8
  12. 2025Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning for Market Making: Competition without Collusioncited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.