Researcher profile

Peter McBurney

Peter McBurney contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
3topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2015arXiv

Learning Unfair Trading: a Market Manipulation Analysis From the Reinforcement Learning Perspective

Market manipulation is a strategy used by traders to alter the price of financial securities. One type of manipulation is based on the process of buying or selling assets by using several trading strategies, among them spoofing is a popular strategy and is considered illegal by market regulators. Some promising tools have been developed to detect manipulation, but cases can still be found in the markets. In this paper we model spoofing and pinging trading, two strategies that differ in the legal background but share the same elemental concept of market manipulation. We use a reinforcement learning framework within the full and partial observability of Markov decision processes and analyse the underlying behaviour of the manipulators by finding the causes of what encourages the traders to perform fraudulent activities. This reveals procedures to counter the problem that may be helpful to market regulators as our model predicts the activity of spoofers.

preprint2013arXiv

Risk Agoras: Dialectical Argumentation for Scientific Reasoning

We propose a formal framework for intelligent systems which can reason about scientific domains, in particular about the carcinogenicity of chemicals, and we study its properties. Our framework is grounded in a philosophy of scientific enquiry and discourse, and uses a model of dialectical argumentation. The formalism enables representation of scientific uncertainty and conflict in a manner suitable for qualitative reasoning about the domain.

preprint2012arXiv

Formalizing Scenario Analysis

We propose a formal treatment of scenarios in the context of a dialectical argumentation formalism for qualitative reasoning about uncertain propositions. Our formalism extends prior work in which arguments for and against uncertain propositions were presented and compared in interaction spaces called Agoras. We now define the notion of a scenario in this framework and use it to define a set of qualitative uncertainty labels for propositions across a collection of scenarios. This work is intended to lead to a formal theory of scenarios and scenario analysis.