Skip to content
#generative ai Review Open access

From Herding Machines to Autonomous Agents: A Taxonomy of AI-Driven Flash Crash Mechanisms and the Regulatory Gap

Sep 2026 · Journal of Risk and Financial Management · 0 citations · 12 references

TL;DR

A prospective review proposes a three-category taxonomy of the mechanisms through which AI triggers catastrophic, self-reinforcing market dislocations, or “flash crashes,” and concludes with policy recommendations on model-diversity mandates, real-time AI trading surveillance, adaptive circuit-breaker design, and cross-regulatory coordination on GenAI financial disinformation.

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping financial markets—accelerating execution, automating allocation, and concentrating analytical capacity within a shrinking set of foundational models. Prior work has documented AI’s contribution to instability through algorithmic herding and high-frequency volatility, but the literature lacks a coherent classification of the mechanisms through which AI triggers catastrophic, self-reinforcing market dislocations, or “flash crashes.” This prospective review proposes a three-category taxonomy: (1) endogenous algorithmic herding crashes, driven by correlated model behavior; (2) exogenous model error cascade crashes, in which AI system failures propagate across interconnected venues; and (3) adversarial generative AI (GenAI) disinformation crashes, in which fabricated narratives trigger automated trading responses. The taxonomy is further motivated by the structural parallel between contemporary AI model homogeneity and the homogenization of Value-at-Risk (VaR) models before the 2008 crisis—a link recently formalized in the modeling literature. The analysis is extended to the emerging frontier of agentic AI—autonomous systems capable of multi-step planning and inter-agent interaction—which introduces qualitatively new systemic risks that existing regulatory frameworks are unprepared to address. The October 2025 cryptocurrency liquidation cascade, which liquidated over $19 billion within 24 h, serves as the primary empirical case study. The article concludes with policy recommendations on model-diversity mandates, real-time AI trading surveillance, adaptive circuit-breaker design, and cross-regulatory coordination on GenAI financial disinformation.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Review Aug 2026

Agentic AI Systems and Financial Stability, From Model Risk to Systemic Risk

Financial stability rests on the premise that distress is largely idiosyncratic and therefore diversifiable: when one institution errs, the rest of the system absorbs the shock. That premise fails when many decision-makers depend on the same infrastructure. Agentic AI systems, which take consequential actions rather th...

Sriram Nagaraj, S. J. Lee · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

From Algorithmic Trading to Generative AI: Artificial Intelligence, Systemic Risk, and the Transformation of Financial Markets

Artificial intelligence can improve financial information processing while also synchronizing decisions, concentrating operational dependence, and accelerating market feedback. Yet evidence on these effects is divided among market microstructure, machine‐learning risk analytics, algorithmic intermediation, and genera...

Wa-Na Yang, Heng-Yan Liu, Yu Wang · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Collective Loss of Control in LLM Agent Systems: An Epidemic Account of Mutation, Contagion, and Recovery

The account motivates complementary defenses: strengthen resistance and recovery alongside prevention of spontaneous deviations, and audit and restrict unintended communication paths that can turn local failures into collective loss of control.

Xiang-Fan Wu, Zong-Hao Ying, Hui-Yu Wu et al. · 0 citations
Conference Sep 2026

Autonomous AI Decision Control Tower: A Deterministic Multi-Agent Decision Intelligence Framework for Enterprise NoOps

The contemporary paradigm shift toward true “NoOps” environments necessitates an epistemological transition from traditional reactive monitoring to a regime of proactive, high-dimensional reasoning. This paper introduces the Autonomous AI Decision Control Tower (A-ADCT), an avantgarde framework designed to conceptualiz...

Tanay Singh · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

TimeEvo: Failure-Driven Self-Evolution of a Time Series Agent

TimeEvo is proposed, which clusters an agent's diagnosed failures into capability gaps, plans a measurement for each, synthesizes evidence-only tools that fill them, and admits the candidate library only through a paired admission gate.

Jie Yang, Yan Zheng, Jia-Rui Sun et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 30, 2026

Q&A: Hey AI, who should I vote for this year?

MIT professors Adam Berinsky and Chara Podimata discuss a new project to track how AI chatbots are responding to questions about the 2026 U.S. midterm elections.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.