Skip to content

Adversarial Robustness Of Trading Signals

adversarial-robustness-of-trading-signalssource

Use before promoting an ML trading signal, to measure how often epsilon-bounded feature perturbations flip its output. A black-box gradient-free test; for a differentiable net, true FGSM or PGD gives a tighter worst-case bound.

Version
1.3.0
Reading
9 min
Hands off to
9
Handed off from
0
License
Apache-2.0
Coversscikit-learn, numpy

When to Use

Invoke this skill before promoting any ML trading-signal model to production — Random Forests, Gradient Boosted Trees, deep nets, or any model exposing a predict(X) callable. Financial microstructure is adversarial in the technical sense: a flash crash, a spoofing layer, or genuine quote noise can perturb order- book features by less than one bid-ask spread and flip a model's signal from BUY to SELL. A model that flips under such noise is unsafe to trade.

The skill produces a SignalAdversarialTester that injects epsilon-bounded perturbations into the validation feature matrix and reports:

  1. The vulnerability score% of samples whose signal flips, with a one-sided Wilson upper confidence bound on that rate.
  2. The flipped-sample indices — so quant research can attribute which inputs sit on the decision boundary.
  3. A deployment verdict — robust / vulnerable against a tolerance threshold, in two strengths: is_robust (point estimate) and is_robust_at_ci (the confidence bound also clears the tolerance). Gate on the latter.

When NOT to Use

  • Differentiable models requiring a true worst-case bound. This engine is a black-box, gradient-free tester. For a differentiable net, real FGSM/PGD gives a tighter (and actually worst-case) attack: adv_x = x + ε·sign(∇ₓ L). Use a dedicated adversarial-robustness library (CleverHans, Foolbox, ART) instead, then feed that attack's flip rate into this governance gate if you want a uniform scoring contract.
  • Provable-robustness requirements. This is empirical robustness — it can only show a model is vulnerable, never prove it is robust. For a certified L2 radius use Cohen-style randomized smoothing (see references/standards.md §3).
  • Non-ML signals (pure rule-based / threshold strategies with no learned component). Adversarial perturbation of a fixed threshold is just sensitivity analysis; use backtest-parameter-sensitivity-analysis instead.
  • Production-time / online monitoring. The perturbation sweep is O(n_trials) expensive and assumes a static validation set. For live drift monitoring use concept-drift-vs-staleness-differentiation / model-staleness-detection.
  • Insufficient validation data. With < ~1000 out-of-sample samples the flip rate confidence interval is wide; a "pass" near the tolerance is statistically meaningless. Bootstrap or use a larger holdout.

Prerequisites

  • Python 3.10+, numpy.
  • A trained model exposing predict(X) returning one of:
    • integer/boolean 1D labels (used directly as the signal),
    • a 1D float score (split at decision_threshold, default 0.5), or
    • a 2D probability matrix (signal = argmax over columns).
  • A representative out-of-sample validation set X_clean (2D non-empty, all-finite array — NaN/inf are rejected, see Pitfalls). Never test on training data — the model has seen it and will appear artificially robust.
  • A calibrated epsilon — the perturbation budget. Default 0.01 (1% of per-feature scale); for equities, set this to one average bid-ask spread as a fraction of price (see references/standards.md §1).
  • (Recommended) Training-set feature scales — pass feature_scales so the test is independent of the validation sample drawn (the ptp fallback couples ε to the sample).

Workflow

  1. Assemble the validation set. Pull a frozen, out-of-sample X_clean aligned with the model's training feature schema. Confirm it is 2D and finite.

  2. Configure the perturbation budget. Construct an AdversarialRobustnessConfig:

    from signal_adversarial_tester import (
        SignalAdversarialTester, AdversarialRobustnessConfig, NOISE_RANDOM_SIGN,
    )
    
    config = AdversarialRobustnessConfig(
        epsilon=0.01,               # 1% of per-feature scale
        flip_tolerance_pct=5.0,    # reject if > 5% of signals flip
        noise_type=NOISE_RANDOM_SIGN,   # full-magnitude random-sign stress
        n_trials=25,                # for montecarlo_worst only
        seed=42,                    # reproducible (reproducible-ml-pipelines)
        feature_scales=train_scales,   # from training set, not validation
        feature_bounds=train_bounds,   # [min, max] per feature for clipping
        clip_to_clean_domain=True,
        decision_threshold=0.5,
    )
  3. Run the evaluation:

    tester = SignalAdversarialTester(config)
    report = tester.evaluate_model(model.predict, X_clean)
  4. Interpret the verdict:

    • report.is_robust_at_ci == True → the flip rate and its 95% Wilson upper bound clear the tolerance. This is the promotion signal; the model may proceed subject to the other gates in your pipeline.
    • report.is_robust == True but is_robust_at_ci == Falsemarginal. The point estimate clears the tolerance but the validation set is too small to resolve it. Do not promote: grow the holdout (see standards.md §4).
    • report.is_robust == False → reject. Route the model back to quant research for adversarial training (retrain on perturbed data to smooth the decision boundary), feature re-engineering, or a higher decision threshold. Use tester.perturb(X_train, rng) to generate the augmentation with the same noise model the gate failed on.
  5. Attribute the fragility. report.flipped_indices identifies exactly which validation samples sit on a flippable boundary — the actionable set for a targeted adversarial-training augmentation.

Decision Points

Situation Action
vulnerability_score_pct just under tolerance (e.g. 4.7% vs 5%) Check is_robust_at_ci. If the Wilson upper bound does not clear the tolerance the pass is statistically marginal — grow the validation set; do not promote.
Explicit feature_bounds are narrower than the validation range Samples outside the bounds are held to the ε ball, not clipped all the way back — otherwise a multi-ε clip would be scored as an ε-bounded flip. Prefer bounds that actually contain the holdout.
ValueError: X_clean contains N non-finite value(s) A NaN/inf cell would poison the per-feature scale and silently zero the flip rate. Drop or impute the rows upstream; do not disable the check.
random_sign passes but montecarlo_worst (n_trials=50) fails The model is fragile to some perturbation direction that a single draw missed. Trust the worst-of-N bound; reject.
Flips concentrate in a feature subset (inspect flipped_indices → rows) The model is over-reliant on a few fragile features. Re-engineer or drop them rather than globally retrain.
Flip rate is ~50% on a boundary-clustered set Expected for a sharp threshold at the boundary — not a bug. Re-test on a realistic distribution, not a degenerate constant.
Model returns probabilities, not labels Handled automatically (argmax over a 2D array). Verify the class ordering matches your BUY/SELL convention.
Need a true worst-case bound (not empirical) This engine cannot provide it. Graduate to FGSM/PGD (differentiable models) or certified randomized smoothing.
clip_to_clean_domain=True collapses all noise The validation feature domain is degenerate (constant column). Either widen the domain via feature_bounds or set clip_to_clean_domain=False for stress tests that deliberately leave the manifold.
Reproducibility required across CI runs Always set seed. None makes the test non-deterministic and unfit for governance gating.

Common Pitfalls

  • Treating random_sign as worst-case. The legacy worst_case_sign name was a misnomer — the signs are random, not gradient-derived. Worst-case directional noise needs the loss gradient (FGSM). montecarlo_worst gives a lower bound on the worst case by taking the max over N random trials; it is tighter than a single draw but still not a true worst case. Read the verdict accordingly.
  • Testing on training data. The model has memorised its training set; flip rates will be artificially low and the gate is meaningless. Always use a frozen out-of-sample holdout.
  • Epsilon not calibrated to microstructure. A blanket epsilon=0.01 is wrong when features have wildly different scales (price in $ vs a normalized ratio in [0,1]). Either pass per-feature feature_scales (training-set) or calibrate ε to one bid-ask spread per instrument.
  • No domain clipping. Perturbing a price feature to a negative value, or a normalized ratio above 1, produces infeasible inputs that overstate vulnerability (the model never sees them in production). Use clip_to_clean_domain=True or explicit feature_bounds.
  • Gating on the point estimate alone. A 0% flip rate on 50 samples has a 95% Wilson upper bound of 5.13% — it cannot clear a 5% tolerance. is_robust answers "did the point estimate clear?"; only is_robust_at_ci answers "did the evidence clear?". Promote on the latter.
  • NaN in the validation set. Before v1.3.0 a single NaN cell made the per-feature ptp NaN, which made every perturbation NaN, which decoded to one class for clean and adversarial alike — a silent 0% flip rate and an automatic PASS. Non-finite inputs and non-finite model outputs are now hard errors; treat them as data-quality defects, not as things to work around.
  • Non-deterministic governance. A deployment gate that flips verdicts between CI runs is worse than no gate. Always set seed; pin it in the model card.
  • Single noise model. uniform is average-case; it can pass a model that random_sign or montecarlo_worst fails. Run at least random_sign for governance; prefer montecarlo_worst for the tighter bound.
  • Ignoring the probability path. A model returning 2D probabilities is decoded via argmax; a 1D float score via decision_threshold. Verify the decode matches your signal convention before trusting the flip count.
  • Using Gaussian noise only. Gaussian samples rarely reach the ε boundary, so they under-state vulnerability versus random_sign (which always hits the boundary). Do not use Gaussian as the sole stress.

Verification

Run the unit tests:

python -m unittest discover -s skills/adversarial-robustness-of-trading-signals/scripts -v

What they assert:

  • A robust model passes under uniform noise.
  • A fragile model fails under random_sign and under montecarlo_worst.
  • montecarlo_worst reports the max flip rate across n_trials (≥ any single trial).
  • Same seed → identical report and flipped_indices (determinism).
  • 2D probability matrices decode via argmax; 1D float scores via decision_threshold.
  • Domain clipping suppresses infeasible perturbations (both implicit and explicit bounds).
  • Explicit feature_scales collapse a huge ε; zero-variance features fall back to scale 1.0.
  • Config validation rejects negative ε/tolerance, invalid noise_type, n_trials < 1, non-positive feature_scales, mis-shaped feature_bounds, inverted bounds, bad batch_size, out-of-range ci_confidence_level; ε=0 logs a vacuous-gate warning.
  • Inputs that used to yield a silent PASS now raise: non-finite X_clean, zero-sample or zero-feature matrices, non-finite model output, higher-rank model output (which previously corrupted flipped_indices).
  • The domain clip never moves a sample further than ε·scale, so an out-of-domain sample cannot manufacture a flip.
  • wilson_upper_bound matches values derived independently by solving the score equation, and stays non-zero at zero flips.
  • A 0-flip run on 50 samples is is_robust but not is_robust_at_ci; the same result on 5000 samples clears both.
  • Categorical (string) class labels are compared directly instead of raising.
  • perturb() honours the ε budget and the feasible domain, and is seeded.
  • Legacy worst_case_sign alias routes to random_sign (deprecation logged).
  • report.as_dict() round-trips through JSON and carries seed, epsilon and flip_tolerance_pct for the model card.
  • batch_size chunking is byte-identical to whole-array evaluation.
  • Non-2D input raises ValueError.

Confirm with the operational checklist in assets/checklist.md before promoting.

Success Criteria

An adversarial-robustness gate is healthy in production when:

  1. Every model promotion produces a RobustnessReport persisted to the model card with seed, epsilon, noise_type, n_trials, and vulnerability_score_pct.
  2. Promotion is gated on is_robust_at_ci, not on vulnerability_score_pct alone. A 5% tolerance needs roughly ≥ 2000 samples before a realistic observed rate can clear its own confidence bound (standards.md §4).
  3. montecarlo_worst with n_trials ≥ 25 is the default governance noise model; uniform/random_sign single-draw results are recorded but not gating.
  4. epsilon is calibrated per instrument to one average bid-ask spread and the calibration is documented (not a blanket 0.01).
  5. Rejected models are routed to adversarial training with the flipped_indices attached as the augmentation target set.
  6. The gate is deterministic across CI runs (fixed seed); a re-run yields the same verdict.

Verify it, from the repository root

python -m unittest discover -s skills/adversarial-robustness-of-trading-signals/scripts -v

Hands off to 9

Skills this document names, usually in When NOT to Use, as the owner of a case it excludes.

Handed off from 0

Skills that name this one as the place a case belongs. The reverse edges of the graph.

No other skill hands off to this one yet.