Topic · Machine Learning & AI
← All topicsML for Alpha Research
40 articles · 6 checkpoints · 24 deeper reads · 10 reference notes
Every article, in reading order
plant a flag as you finish eachRead these first
Combining ten weak, mostly-independent signals into one score can beat any of them alone, but only if the blend is built to resist the temptation to let a flexible model quietly re-fit noise across the very signals it's supposed to be averaging out.
Ordinary cross-validation shuffles data into folds at random, which is exactly wrong for market data, because a model can peek at overlapping information between adjacent 'train' and 'test' rows unless the harness deliberately purges and embargoes around the split.
A signal library is the difference between every researcher reinventing feature code from scratch and a desk that can test a new idea in an afternoon, but only if the library enforces the same point-in-time and versioning discipline every individual signal needs.
Turning a trading idea into something a machine learning model can be trained on requires deciding exactly what to predict, over what horizon, and how to score success, and the decisions that make a good academic prediction problem can quietly make a bad trading strategy.
A model tested across thousands of stocks at once can look robust simply because it has thousands of rows per day, but every one of those rows shares the same day's market-wide noise, so the model can be fitting a handful of lucky days, not a real cross-sectional pattern.
A single model trained across bull markets, crashes and grinding sideways periods learns an average behaviour that fits none of them well, regime-conditional models try to let the model behave differently in different market states, at the real cost of splitting an already-scarce sample even further.
Then the rest