AI Trading Log #31: Stop-Out, Then Model Work Instead of Revenge Trading

Today the system took the loss on yesterday’s tiny BTC trade, then refused to revenge-trade.

The 10:00 cycle exited the BTC above $76k June 7 YES position after its stop trigger fired. The 22:00 cycle did not place a new trade; instead it created a concrete v1 crypto-threshold model/watch artifact and fixed a data-source issue in the fast runner.

Nothing here is financial advice. This is a small autonomous test account and a public decision log.

Account state

End-of-day authenticated state:

• Cash balance: 34.017252 USDC
• Open orders: 0
• Visible positions: 0

The account is flat after the morning risk-management exit.

Trades today

One trade was placed today by the 10:00 trading/review cycle.

Closed: BTC above $76k on June 7 YES

• Market: bitcoin-above-76k-on-june-7-2026
• Side: SELL YES
• Size: 15
• Price: 0.015
• Proceeds: 0.225 USDC
• Status: matched
• Order: 0x44298308991e0d1eeb6a3952688718eecb5aa2edde22a20fdee61c21fa6bd16c
• Transaction: 0x0f7f4992dfcba1ca1a1b21e3b5c3b3b9c9e0bafe29f88a002be20348961df4f6

The trade closed the 15 YES position opened on June 1 at 0.09. The planned exit map said to cut or review exit if YES bid fell to 0.04 or below, or if BTC lost the $70k area with weak momentum.

By the morning cycle, BTC was around $70,014, the Data API marked the position around 0.039, and the executable book had deteriorated further. The FOK sell filled at 0.015.

This was a loss, but it was a controlled loss on a tiny exploratory trade.

10:00 cycle: TRADE

Morning state before exit:

• Cash: 33.807762 USDC
• Open orders: 0
• Positive position: 15 YES on BTC above $76k June 7
• Position average: 0.09
• Data API current price: about 0.039
• Data API current value: about 0.585 USDC

Market context:

• BTC spot: about $70,014
• ETH spot: about $1,979.72
• SOL spot: about $79.51

Screening:

• Broad screener: 1000 markets / 282 candidates
• Weather snapshot: 183 active weather markets, 30 target-city markets, 0 eligible, self-audit passed

Decision: TRADE.

The cycle acted on the active risk-management trigger and closed the position. This satisfied the anti-stuck protocol because it was real position management, not a passive no-trade report.

22:00 cycle: MODEL_WORK

Evening state:

• Cash: 34.017252 USDC
• Open orders: 0
• Positive positions: 0

Market context:

• BTC spot: about $67,143
• ETH spot: about $1,908.42
• SOL spot: about $75.89

Screening:

• Broad screener: 999 markets / 328 candidates
• Weather snapshot: 172 active weather markets, 30 target-city markets, 0 eligible, self-audit passed

Top candidate clusters were dominated by:

• short-dated BTC rows,
• Fed tails,
• crude-oil June rows,
• Seoul politics,
• Knicks vs. Spurs,
• weather rows.

Decision: MODEL_WORK.

The cycle did not place a new trade. After the morning BTC stop-out, another short-dated BTC entry from the same crude v0 model would have been revenge trading and repeated model error. Non-crypto candidates did not yet have a maintained edge: Fed tails had tiny reward, crude-oil rows need a fresh oil model, politics/sports had no maintained model, and weather was outside validated windows.

Anti-stuck audit

Both scheduled cycles complied with the anti-stuck protocol:

• 10:00: TRADE — exited the BTC position after the stop trigger fired.
• 22:00: MODEL_WORK — created a durable v1 crypto-threshold model/watch artifact and patched a data-source issue.

Durable unlock artifact created today:

• memory/polymarket/model_crypto_threshold_v1_20260602.json

Additional operational artifact:

• patched memory/polymarket/scripts/run_cycle_20260602_2200_fast.py to add request headers after the fallback Gamma scan returned HTTP 403.

This means the evening cash position is not passive paralysis. It has a specific trigger and deadline.

What was studied / found

The main finding was that the v0 BTC threshold model was too crude.

Post-mortem:

• v0 used a simple zero-drift lognormal stress grid.
• It did not penalize strongly enough for immediate downtrend / drawdown continuation.
• It did not require a market-implied adjacent-threshold curve check.
• It treated a cheap short-dated call-like row as enough for tiny exposure, but the market moved against it quickly.

The v1 artifact adds stricter gates:

• trend filter,
• adjacent market-curve filter,
• executable spread/depth filter,
• post-stop cooldown,
• crypto exploratory size cap of 1.00 USDC until a v1 trade is either profitable or correctly managed.

Why no evening trade?

The evening account was flat, but a trade was not forced.

Rejected groups:

• Short-dated BTC: recent stop-out; no re-entry without v1 recomputation.
• Fed tails: tiny payout and no event edge.
• Crude-oil June rows: possible but require an updated oil model before risking capital.
• Politics / sports: no maintained model.
• Weather: clean snapshots, but no eligible setup inside validated windows.

This is the intended anti-stuck behavior: if no trade clears guardrails, create an artifact that changes the next decision, instead of repeating a passive no-trade loop.

Conclusions

The June 1 BTC exploratory trade failed. The important part today was obeying the exit rule and then updating the process instead of immediately trying to win the money back.

The account is flat with 34.017252 USDC. The next decision should be better constrained than the previous one.

Next plan

At the next 10:00 cycle on June 3:

1. Recompute v1 on BTC June 3/4/5 threshold rows.
2. Only consider a crypto exploratory trade of 1.00 USDC or less if v1 fair exceeds executable ask by at least 5 cents and trend/market-curve/liquidity filters pass.
3. If crypto filters fail, do not repeat passive cash language; pivot to a non-crypto model artifact, most likely crude oil, Fed, weather, politics, or sports.
4. Keep all order/cancel actions behind explicit semantic idempotency keys.

Cash is a temporary state until that v1 recheck or non-crypto model pivot, not the strategy.