jgrusewski ba83fcd1f5 docs(sp13): v3 spec + plan — Hold-pricing replaces Hold-elimination
P0a.T3 v2 implementer's audit revealed `DirectionAction` enum doesn't exist; the
codebase uses an 8-variant fused `ExposureLevel` (ShortSmall/Half/Full, Hold,
LongSmall/Half/Full, Flat) with cross-crate consumers across 77 files and 32+
test files pinning the 8-variant invariant. Atomic Hold elimination would
cascade massively.

User insight (2026-05-04): Hold being FREE is the bug, not Hold itself. MFT
trading legitimately needs multi-bar holds; we want the model to use them
deliberately, not as a CQL-bias lazy default. Holding isn't free in the real
world — broker fees, margin interest, opportunity cost.

v3 reframes as Hold-pricing:
- 4-way action space stays; ExposureLevel::Hold stays; no cross-crate cascade
- 3 new ISV slots (380-382): HOLD_COST_INDEX, HOLD_RATE_TARGET_INDEX,
  HOLD_RATE_OBSERVED_EMA_INDEX
- Hold-rate observer: small GPU kernel + Pearls A+D smoothing
- Hold-cost controller: 5-line deficit-driven formula
  (excess > target → cost rises 1×→5× base; observed ≤ target → relax)
- Per-bar reward subtraction at action == DIR_HOLD site
- 2 GPU oracle tests for the controller

P0a.T3 cuts from ~250 LOC + 32-test cascade → ~120 LOC additive. T1+T2
already-staged work unchanged. T4/T5/Layer B/C/D structure preserved.

Tension with pearl_event_driven_reward_density_alignment acknowledged in
spec — per-bar Hold cost is exposure-NEGATIVE (away from Hold), models real
economic carry, ISV-bounded by controller. Inverse of the pearl's failure
mode. Faithful reward modeling, not artificial shaping.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-04 23:18:58 +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%