Skip to content
MeanyDeanyQuantitative Research Systems

MeanyDeany · Methodology

Research methodology

Time-respecting construction, narrow model roles, robust comparison, immutable evidence, and visible failure states.

Data
Time-respecting
Models
Compared, not canonized
Evidence
Auditable and immutable
Permission
Outside model output

Working principles

Research credibility is cumulative

No single diagnostic establishes a system's validity. Credibility accumulates through temporal discipline, robustness, provenance, operational integrity, and appropriately narrow claims.

  1. 01Evidence before permission

    A model output earns interpretation through validation. It does not become an entry, veto, sizing, or execution instruction by default.

  2. 02Time-respecting data construction

    Features, states, and outcomes use information available at the evaluated timestamp. Alignment rules are explicit and missing data is not silently repaired.

  3. 03Model comparison and robustness

    Ablation, alternative specifications, walk-forward evaluation, and subperiod checks matter more than a single favorable summary statistic.

  4. 04Immutable evidence and provenance

    Historical research records should remain inspectable as hypotheses evolve. Source identity and transformation history belong beside the result.

  5. 05Operational reliability

    Duplicate protection, stale-input detection, locking, scheduling, and failure states are part of research validity when systems generate evidence repeatedly.

  6. 06Evidence, policy, and execution stay separate

    Descriptive evidence can inform later policy research, but policy state is not entry permission and neither layer authorizes execution.

Research notes

Short rules for difficult decisions

01
Timestamp discipline
If a value was not knowable at the decision timestamp, it does not belong in the feature set.
02
Narrow claims
Model maturity, forecast loss, and regime labels answer research questions—not whether a strategy is approved.
03
Visible failure
A failed input, orphan reference, or stale process should remain observable instead of being hidden by a plausible fallback.
04
Reproducible lineage
A result is stronger when another reviewer can trace its inputs, specification, timing, and limitations.

Separation of concerns

One pipeline, three distinct responsibilities

Evidence
What the data and model record support.
Interpretation
How the evidence is framed and challenged.
Policy
A separate research layer with explicit rules.
Execution
Not part of this public portfolio.