An LLM asked for a trading strategy returns three artifacts at once: a natural-language rationale, an executable implementation, and once run, a track record. Whether these are the same object is rare...
arXiv:2610. 32380v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can read startup pitch decks, but letting them emit investment scores directly invites score inflation, run-to-run variance and rationales that are hard to audit.
arXiv:2610.03080v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are moving from producing trading signals to writing the code that executes them. The failure mode of the second role is silent...
arXiv:2607. 06495v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Live sports commentary is grounded generation under a deadline: statements concern real, named athletes, the grounding state changes every few seconds, and no reference text exists at generation time.
FIDES-Live extends the FIDES framework to audit sequential trading agents by separating decision validity, numerical commitment adherence, execution and ledger reconciliation, and receipt‑grounded reporting. In a retrospective audit of 7,299 cryptocurrency account‑rounds and a 310‑round equity pilot, decision validity reached 97.35% and structured reporting accuracy 90.81%, while commitment adherence overall was 94.36% but dropped to 62.63% for non‑empty order proposals. The study shows that all cash and position transitions reconcile with recorded fills, and highlights the need to report concordance, evidence coverage, activity, and financial outcomes separately.
arXiv:2609.27051v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language-model agents now run the whole of quantitative factor research: they propose investment factors, backtest them, select the survivors and retir...
Sequential trading agents produce decisions, orders, execution receipts, account states, and reports that need not agree, even when the final portfolio value is correctly computed. We present FIDES-Li...
arXiv:2607. 05904v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training a language model against its own reference-free judgments (the premise of self-rewarding, self-play, and LLM-as-a-judge pipelines) assumes a model's verdict on a shown answer tracks correctness.
arXiv:2610.18354v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Game-theoretic benchmarks claim that large language model (LLM) strategic decision-making varies across game types, interaction structures, and capabil...
The paper reports a six‑month, population‑scale measurement of autonomous language‑model trading agents operating in two production fleets: DX Terminal Pro, with 3,505 user‑funded vaults trading real ETH in Base memecoin markets, and the DXAP live alpha fleet, with 500–599 user‑created agents trading Hyperliquid perpetuals. Across roughly 7.5 million single‑model invocations and 231,638 multi‑tool turns, the study finds that operating layer design, risk sliders, and leaderboard boundaries drive behavior more than strategy text; agents are volatility‑blind in sizing, capture little upside, and show no directional edge compared to a retail benchmark. The analysis includes regression discontinuity, permutation nulls, and a 17‑rule methodology canon to validate the findings.
arXiv:2608. 06108v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Investment competence is inherently personalized: the same market evidence can justify different actions for investors with different goals, horizons, portfolios, and risk boundaries.
The paper evaluates how well typed decision models, which output probability distributions, actually provide reliable guarantees. By comparing open-weight Laya and Jev 1.13 across 190 evaluations, the study finds that point‑estimate thresholds frequently break promised accuracy, while a Beta lower‑bound rule and Learn‑then‑Test approach maintain guarantees more consistently. The work also explores calibration across languages, the impact of noise, data requirements for fine‑tuning, and the limitations of confidence in predicting outcomes or providing faithful explanations.