Fortunately.
Googling "Libor scandal" I get about 17 Million results. Don't be afraid, I am not adding another comment or assessment. It is self explaining .. ? Is it?
Think a little about the microlevels. One and a half year ago I wrote Nearly Everybody Cheats a Little, referring to a contribution of Dan Ariely in "Wired Magazine". Cheating is one of the core topics in Dan's research - his latest book: The Honest Truth About Dishonesty.
We lie, cheat, bend and break rules? On the short run trickery is easy. To build mutually beneficial long-term relationships is not.
I do not want to talk about the moral framework, just good sense.
There are technologies that allow us for extracting knowledge, meaning, features, ... from data - and in an intelligent combination with analytics modeling they can help us to detect anomalies.
Humans are usually not able to understand the consequences of their actions on the long run. Cheaters often start off small and as time goes by they find it easier to cheat, but they cheat in patterns ... And it becomes worse when a network of contagion builds.
Quant finance. UnRisk users could see it with their "eyes"?
If they run comprehensive model-method scenarios and find the resulting time series differ significantly, something is wrong with the instruments, rules, data .... And they should stay away from the deal if not fully understanding the sources and reasons of such anomalies ...
No, UnRisk is not a fraud prevention system, but UnRisk FACTORY can provide massive results that can be analyzed.
