A structured semantic search for trading ideas helps LLMs find better factors: ALPHASCHEMA’s schema-driven exploration produces factor pools that outperform standard factor libraries, ML predictors and prior agentic miners in CSI300 backtests, while implementations across different LLMs show comparable predictive quality.

Main Finding

ALPHASCHEMA introduces a structured semantic search framework for automated alpha mining that separates “what to search” (a compact, interpretable semantic plan) from “how to implement it” (LLM-produced factor code). Operating over a finite vocabulary of Events, Contexts, Qualities, Directions and Outputs, ALPHASCHEMA learns a LightGBM surrogate mapping semantic plans to expected backtest reward, and uses an adaptive quota selector (exploration, surrogate exploitation, local mutation) to allocate expensive factor implementations. On CSI300 (2016–2025 split) the discovered factor pools (120–150 factors) achieve competitive-to-best predictive and portfolio metrics versus ML predictors, open-source factor libraries, and other agentic mining systems; the semantic search both preserves diversity and increasingly concentrates evaluations on high-reward semantic regions. Realizations of the same semantic plans by different LLMs give comparable predictive quality, implying robustness to the choice of LLM within this framework.

Key Points

• New search object: semantic plan p = (Event, Context, Qualities, Direction, Output) that encodes intended trading semantics before any formula or code.
• Decoupling search and realization: LLM(s) translate semantic plans into executable factor code; multiple realizations for one plan are allowed/expected.
• Reward modeling: maintain cumulative plan–reward buffer and train a LightGBM surrogate on one-hot/interaction features of the schema to predict plan reward.
• Selection strategy: iterative rounds, sample large candidate pool, allocate limited implementation budget via quota scheduler:
  • Exploration (structural novelty) with annealed share ρt,
  • Surrogate-guided exploitation (predicted high-reward plans),
  • Local mutation (single-component changes around high-reward plans).
• Implementation guards: each realization is subjected to execution, numerical stability, contract and leakage checks; failed realizations get a zero reward (penalty).
• Reward definition: for each realization, rp,s = α RankIC + β RankICIR − λ ∆lag (choose best of fast/slow realizations); coefficients tuned in appendix.
• Vocabulary and search scale: OHLCV semantic space instantiated with 140 schema components (40 Events, 40 Contexts, 50 Qualities, 3 Directions, 7 Outputs); +FUNDAMENTAL adds ~30 fundamental schemas.
• Experimental setup: default code-agent DeepSeek-V4-Flash; 16 plans evaluated per round; 80 rounds; first 10 rounds pure exploration; five independent runs; final pools built by reward ranking + correlation filtering.
• Main empirical results:
  • ALPHASCHEMA (OHLCV) pool (120 factors) achieved highest IC = 0.0382 and ICIR = 0.2374 among compared methods in the CSI300 test period.
  • +FUNDAMENTAL (150 factors) pool further improved portfolio IR (1.0877) and annualized excess return (AER 11.94%).
  • NAV trajectories show higher realized growth than representative baselines under the same backtest protocol.
• Ablations on schema components (100 plans, leave-one-component-out):
  • Removing any component degrades factor quality and/or implementation validity.
  • Approximate |RankIC| drops and implementation-validity drops:
    • w/o Context: ~30.6% |RankIC| drop, ~6.0% validity drop
    • w/o Direction: ~28.3% |RankIC| drop, ~12.0% validity drop
    • w/o Qualities: ~27.1% |RankIC| drop, ~5.0% validity drop
    • w/o Output: ~24.9% |RankIC| drop, ~4.0% validity drop
    • w/o Event: ~21.1% |RankIC| drop, ~7.0% validity drop
• Robustness: different LLMs implementing the same semantic plans produced comparable predictive quality, suggesting semantic priors (not model-specific code quirks) drive much of the discovered alpha.

Data & Methods

• Data:
  • Universe: CSI300 (Chinese equities).
  • Time splits: training 2016-01-01 to 2020-12-31; validation 2021-01-01 to 2022-12-31; test 2023-01-01 to 2025-12-31.
  • Target: 5-day forward close-to-close return.
• Metrics:
  • Predictive: IC, ICIR, RankIC, RankICIR.
  • Portfolio: IR (information ratio), AER (annualized excess return), MDD (max drawdown).
  • Backtest protocol: CSRanKNorm, LightGBM combiner for pool->strategy, Top50/Drop5 construction, trading costs and procedures in appendix.
• Semantic plan space:
  • P = VE × VC × Qset × VD × VO with Qset allowing 0–3 quality constraints.
  • Default vocabulary: 40 Events, 40 Contexts, 50 Qualities, 3 Directions, 7 Outputs (OHLCV); +FUND adds fundamental schema items.
• Search loop:
  • Generate/sampled candidate pool (large).
  • Score candidates with LightGBM surrogate trained on cumulative buffer Dt of (p, r(p)) pairs; input features ϕ(p) include one-hot encodings, category counts, pairwise interactions.
  • Quota-based selection per round (batch size B = 16): exploration fraction ρt (anneals over evaluated count nt), remainder split between exploitation (top surrogate scores) and mutation (neighbors of high-reward plans).
  • Realization: LLM translates plan to factor code; each plan realized at fast and slow time scales; execution guards and one repair attempt; failed realizations → zero reward.
  • Reward computation: combine RankIC and RankICIR with lag penalty; use max of fast/slow realization reward as plan reward.
  • Retrain surrogate on cumulative buffer after each round.
• Implementation:
  • Default LLM: DeepSeek-V4-Flash for low inference cost; experiments also use other LLMs for robustness checks.
  • Rounds: 80 rounds, 16 plans/round, 5 independent runs; final pool selected by reward ranking plus correlation filtering to avoid redundancy.

Implications for AI Economics

• Methodological:
  • Semantic abstraction creates a reusable, interpretable search space for automated discovery. This reduces coupling to particular LLM prompt-engineering and makes exploration behavior reproducible and optimizable across runs and teams.
  • Surrogate-guided semantic search is sample-efficient: it leverages expensive backtests by learning which semantic structures yield useful factors, enabling focused future exploration and lower compute/wall-time cost compared with blind program-level search or purely agent-driven discovery.
  • Decoupling semantics from implementation supports ensemble-style robustness: the same semantic plan can be instantiated by different code-generation engines/LLMs with similar outcomes, reducing single-model fragility.
• Practical asset-management impact:
  • The approach yields interpretable factor pools that can be explained in economic/phenomenon-driven terms (events, contexts, qualities), aiding governance, model-risk management, and compliance.
  • By scheduling budget between exploration and exploitation, firms can systematically balance discovery of novel hypotheses with refinement of high-conviction ideas, making automation better aligned with limited implementation/backtesting budgets.
• Research and deployment cautions:
  • While semantic priors help, the method still depends on backtest quality and robust leakage controls; the framework includes execution guards, but production deployment requires continuous monitoring for regime shifts and real-world frictions (market impact, liquidity).
  • The semantic-space design (vocabulary choices) matters: incomplete or biased vocabularies constrain discoveries; building vocabularies should combine domain expertise and empirical feedback.
  • Ethical/regulatory considerations: automated discovery can generate many strategies; governance is needed to ensure strategies are not socially harmful or violate market rules.
• Broader significance:
  • ALPHASCHEMA demonstrates a scalable pattern for combining symbolic/semantic abstractions with LLMs: use LLMs as translators and implementers, but learn and optimize over a compact, interpretable semantic manifold. This pattern can generalize beyond equities to other financial domains (futures, FX, credit) and to other economic discovery tasks where separating hypothesis space from implementation is beneficial.