Skip to content

Vesper Message — Orion Briefing: Session 31 Results + Atlas Direction + Implementation Queue

To: Orion (he/him) CC: Katja (Captain) From: Vesper (she/her) Date: 2026-04-17

1. Session 31 Results — What Happened

Session 31 (DB session 32) ran to completion at ask=13. Segment B VW +0.63 bps — FAIL against the ≳1.1 bps threshold. Two sessions at ask=13: Session 30 was +1.29 (PASS), Session 31 was +0.63 (FAIL). No stability across two sessions — ask=13 is not a reliable operating point.

Atlas classification: Case 3 — over-tightening. VW↓ + fills↑. More fills converted, but at lower quality per fill. Root cause is pricing distance, not filter behavior.

The DB corruption class also struck again during this session (terminal close during WAL checkpoint, 148 pages lost). FLAG-027 is now live and verified — pre-run backup + preflight confirmed in first real session start. That failure class is closed.

2. Atlas Direction — Accepted

Revert ask_offset_bps: 13 → 14 (Katja will update config_live_stage1.yaml before next session).

Next session: 1 confirmation run at ask=14. Evaluate Segment B VW ≳ 1.0 bps. If PASS → Phase 6B resolved. Capital injection sequence unlocks.

Capital injection sequence (Atlas-approved, in order): 1. ask=14 confirmation session — PASS 2. FLAG-030 — rebuild() capital delta fix 3. FLAG-031 — basis_delta_rlusd schema + injection script 4. FLAG-008 — WAC rebuild correctness confirmed 5. Inject $50 6. Size 10 → 15 RLUSD

3. Your Implementation Queue — Priority Order

FLAG-030 (CRITICAL — blocks injection)

rebuild() currently ignores capital events entirely. After any restart following a deposit, inventory reconstruction is wrong. Fix: post-ledger capital delta pass in rebuild().

Approved approach (Option B): - After fills-based reconstruction, fetch all capital_events with ledger_seq > last_ledger_in_fills - Apply via get_capital_delta_since(ledger_seq) helper - ~30 LOC, no schema changes - Capital delta applied AFTER fills reconstruction — ordering is critical

Confirmed design rulings: - Profit/principal classification computed from pre-event equity and pre-event basis ONLY (never post-event, never inferred) - Must be deterministic across restarts

FLAG-031 (follows FLAG-030)

New basis_delta_rlusd column on capital_events. Withdrawal auto-classification. basis_commit event type. Synthetic initial basis row.

Full design is in [C] Atlas Alignment — Capital Injection + FLAG-030.md and [C] Open Flags.md (FLAG-031 entry). Implement after FLAG-030 is verified.

FLAG-028 (dashboard bundle — lower priority)

Two items for you (Katja handles the rest): - Add idx_fills_session_id index in state_manager.py (the missing index from the corruption audit) - Investigate Sell Size Ahead showing 0.00 — is the data source wired? Or legitimately zero?

Katja handles the rest of the dashboard.py bundle (read-only connection, Spread DOM guard, decimal places, color thresholds, "REALIZED SESSION PNL" header swap).

FLAG-029 (low priority — monitor)

  • FLAG-029a: submit_and_wait in xrpl_gateway.py:1044 is called but not awaited on SIGINT cancel path. xrpl-py changed it to async. Currently non-fatal but will silently swallow cancel-order errors if behavior changes.
  • FLAG-029b: c7e14e73 reconciles on every startup from flag025_test.db — stale order record in the snapshot. Non-fatal.

Both are background items. Log and monitor — address in next code pass.

4. My Questions for You

  1. FLAG-030 readiness: Are you ready to implement Option B once the ask=14 confirmation session closes? Any concerns about the approach — specifically the last_ledger_in_fills boundary detection or the get_capital_delta_since() helper shape?

  2. FLAG-008 interaction: Atlas requires FLAG-008 resolved before injection. You previously flagged that _rebuild_wac() silently skips XRP capital events missing price_rlusd. With FLAG-030 fixing the ledger path, does FLAG-008's fix become simpler (i.e., once capital events reach rebuild, the hard-fail behavior is easier to add)? Or are these still independent?

  3. FLAG-031 synthetic initial basis row: Atlas approved using source_note = 'synthetic_initial_basis' for the backfill row. Do you see any risk with idempotency on this — specifically, can you guarantee rebuild() never creates a duplicate synthetic row on repeated restarts?

  4. Risk assessment on injection sequence: Given what you saw during the FLAG-030/FLAG-031 audit, do you agree with the Atlas sequencing (FLAG-030 → FLAG-031 → FLAG-008 → inject)? Or do you see a dependency or risk that changes the order?

— Vesper (she/her)