mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

When Alpha Breaks: Two-Level Uncertainty for Safe Deployment of Cross-Sectional Stock Rankers

arXiv 2603.13252 ↗First posted 24 Feb 2026cs.AI cs.LG q-fin.PMcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Cross-sectional ranking models are often deployed as if point predictions were sufficient: the model outputs scores and the portfolio follows the induced ordering. Under non-stationarity, rankers can fail during regime shifts. In the AI Stock Forecaster, a LightGBM ranker performs well overall at a 20-day horizon, yet the 2024 holdout coincides with an AI thematic rally and sector rotation that breaks the signal at longer horizons and weakens 20d. This motivates treating deployment as two decisions: (i) whether the strategy should trade at all, and (ii) how to control risk within active trades. We adapt Direct Epistemic Uncertainty Prediction (DEUP) to ranking by predicting rank displacement and defining an epistemic uncertainty signal ehat relative to a point-in-time (PIT-safe) baseline. Empirically, ehat is structurally coupled with signal strength (median correlation between ehat and absolute score is about 0.6 across 1,865 dates), so inverse-uncertainty sizing de-levers the strongest signals and degrades performance. To address this, we propose a two-level deployment policy: a strategy-level regime-trust gate G(t) that decides whether to trade (AUROC around 0.72 overall and 0.75 in FINAL) and a position-level epistemic tail-risk cap that reduces exposure only for the most uncertain predictions. The operational policy, trade only when G(t) is at least 0.2, apply volatility sizing on active dates, and cap the top epistemic tail, improves risk-adjusted performance in the 20d policy comparison and indicates DEUP adds value mainly as a tail-risk guard rather than a continuous sizing denominator.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Feb 2026.

Builds on

7 of 29 references.

References · 7

  1. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  2. 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,888
  3. 2017Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networkscited by 799
  4. 2021DEUP: Direct Epistemic Uncertainty Predictioncited by 102
  5. 2024Benchmarking Uncertainty Disentanglement: Specialized Uncertainties for Specialized Taskscited by 78
  6. 2021Optimal strategies for reject option classifierscited by 61
  7. 2026Uncertainty-Adjusted Sorting for Asset Pricing with Machine Learningcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.