jgrusewski 29e54a5bb9 fix(dqn): invert adaptive gamma direction on low atom utilization
Val-Flat-collapse fix #4 (task #94, 2026-04-24). Research-agent audit
of train-bv2n5 identified a positive-feedback loop driving atom
utilisation to 1%:

    util < 0.4 → γ -= 0.01 (toward 0.90 floor)
    γ × delta_z shrinks → TD targets concentrate on fewer bins
    → more collapse → util lower → γ lower ...

The original controller had the right structure but the wrong
direction on the low-util branch. Flipping the sign (`-=` → `+=`)
breaks the loop: when atoms collapse, raising γ widens the effective
TD-target support `γ × atom_support`, pushing targets across more
bins of the C51 grid and giving the network more distributional
signal to learn from.

Evidence from train-bv2n5 (pre-fix): atom_util stuck at 0.01 for 16
epochs; γ slowly drifted toward 0.90. No mechanism recovered.

Change localised to a single `else if util < 0.4` branch at
`training_loop.rs:660-675`. Same step size (0.005) as the healthy
branch avoids overshoot on the recovery path. Clamps retained
[0.90, 0.95] at this layer; the fused trainer re-clamps to
[0.90, 0.995] after regime adjustment downstream.

Other pending atom-util fixes from the audit (deferred pending
validation):
- Atom-entropy regularisation term in C51 loss (medium risk)
- Absolute v_half floor in update_eval_v_range (low risk)
- TD-target dithering before Bellman projection (low risk)
This single-line fix addresses the dominant mechanism — research
agent labelled it "lowest risk, highest leverage". If util remains
low after this, the others stack additively.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-24 00:26:39 +02:00

Foxhunt

Production HFT trading system in Rust.

Architecture

The workspace contains 32 crates organized as follows:

Core Libraries (16)

Crate Purpose
trading_engine Order processing, FIX 4.4, IB TWS, SIMD, RDTSC timing
risk VaR, Kelly, circuit breakers, kill switches, compliance
risk-data Risk data types and shared structures
trading-data Trading data types
ml DQN Rainbow, PPO, TFT, Mamba2, ensemble inference
ml-data ML data types and feature definitions
data Market data ingestion and storage
backtesting Replay engine, strategy tester
adaptive-strategy Ensemble execution, microstructure analysis
common Shared types, resilience, error handling
storage S3 and local model storage
model_loader Model serialization and loading
market-data Market data feed handlers
database PostgreSQL access layer (SQLx)
config Configuration management
tli CLI commands and tooling

Services (8)

Service Purpose
backtesting_service gRPC backtesting service
broker_gateway_service FIX routing, broker connectivity
trading_service Core trading operations
ml_training_service Model training orchestration
data_acquisition_service Market data acquisition
trading_agent_service Autonomous trading agents
api_gateway gRPC API gateway with auth
web-gateway Axum REST + WebSocket gateway

Frontend

web-dashboard/ -- React 19 + TypeScript + Vite + TradingView charts.

Building

# Check compilation (no PostgreSQL required)
SQLX_OFFLINE=true cargo check --workspace

# Run tests for a specific crate
SQLX_OFFLINE=true cargo test -p <crate> --lib

# Clippy
SQLX_OFFLINE=true cargo clippy --workspace

ML Models

Four production model architectures on Candle v0.9.1 with CUDA:

  • DQN Rainbow -- Deep Q-Network with prioritized replay, dueling heads, noisy nets
  • PPO -- Proximal Policy Optimization with GAE and LSTM policies
  • TFT -- Temporal Fusion Transformer for multi-horizon forecasting
  • Mamba2 -- State space model for sequence prediction

Each model has a standalone trainer and a UnifiedTrainable adapter for the hyperopt pipeline.

Infrastructure

  • Git: Gitea at git.fxhnt.ai (Tailscale-only), Scaleway DEV1-S
  • Observability: OpenTelemetry OTLP (env OTEL_EXPORTER_OTLP_ENDPOINT)
  • Database: PostgreSQL with SQLx offline mode for CI

License

Proprietary. All rights reserved.

Description
No description provided
Readme 849 MiB
Languages
Rust 88.2%
Cuda 7.7%
Python 1.3%
Shell 1.1%
PLpgSQL 0.8%
Other 0.8%