book: fold Q-campaign (exp 33-43) evidence into ledger, claims, and chapters

- EVIDENCE#022-032: Q01-Q11 runs (2 PASS / 9 FAIL) with run_ids and branches
- CLAIMS: promote M2 Sharpe-drift to PROVEN (Q01), refute Kelly (Q06), risk-limit-as-alpha (Q08), standalone reversal (Q11); add label-horizon + weekly-rebalance + long-short-turnover claims
- README: TOC + claim inventories for ch 04/05/07/08/09/10/12 updated to the Q-campaign
- new chapters 04 (prune), 05 (ensembles), 07 (isolation), 08 (construction), 09 (cost/turnover), 10 (risk limits & gates), 12 (synthesis); ch 00/02/03 updated
- Q08 calibration evidence persisted under book/data/evidence/q08-risklimit/

book/EVIDENCE.md

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ Experiments 8–18 record metrics under a legacy schema (`ls_sharpe`, `maxdd_wit
 | EVIDENCE#008 | Risk-limit A/B: $5M liquidity floor → net IR 0.81→0.98, cumDD 7.93%→5.44%; size cap 15% + conc 60% hurts (IR 0.816, ann 6.11%). | exp 18, run `28c7fa08…` (mlflow exp 21), branch `exp/18-risk-limit-control-on-the-reference-ense` | NOT usable as PROVEN — pre-clean-lake (idea: liquidity floor > concentration caps) |
 | EVIDENCE#009 | Improvement sweep (R1-R5): 4/5 refuted; R2 momentum gate and R3 HMM gate are byte-identical no-ops; R5 MA3/EWMA marginal (IR 0.049). Conclusion: signal quality is the bottleneck, not the execution/risk layer. | exp 20, run `958198a8…` (mlflow exp 21), branch `exp/20-improve-the-risk-limit-reference-signal` | NOT usable as PROVEN — pre-clean-lake (idea: gates are no-ops when signal is weak) |
 
-## Post-reset period (exp 21–31) — canonical, current
+## Post-reset period (exp 21–43) — canonical, current
 
 | ID | Claim | Source | Verified? |
 |----|-------|--------|-----------|
@@ -38,6 +38,17 @@ Experiments 8–18 record metrics under a legacy schema (`ls_sharpe`, `maxdd_wit
 | EVIDENCE#017 | Multi-horizon momentum bundle refuted: IC 0.0337 vs 0.0511, net −13.35% (IR −1.12) vs +2.13%. | exp 29, run `b4586675…` (mlflow exp 28), branch `exp/29-isolation-run-m1-does-adding-multi-horiz` | yes |
 | EVIDENCE#018 | Risk-adjusted 22d Sharpe drift: mixed — rank metrics lower (RankIC 0.0576 vs 0.0663) but portfolio strong (net +6.53% IR 0.62 vs +2.13% IR 0.21). Single run, unreproduced. | exp 30, run `d5d775f9…` (mlflow exp 29), branch `exp/30-isolation-run-m2-does-adding-risk-adjust` | yes — mark HYPOTHESIS in text |
 | EVIDENCE#019 | GARCH(1,1) vol-regime trio refuted: IC 0.0415 vs 0.0511, RankICIR 0.179 vs 0.255, net +1.36% (IR 0.13). | exp 31, run `514cb523…` (mlflow exp 30), branch `exp/31-isolation-run-m3-does-adding-garch11-vol` | yes |
+| EVIDENCE#022 | Q01 M2 repro: adding sp_sharpe_22 to the compact 25-field set reproduces exp-30 exactly (IC 0.0464, ICIR 0.211, RankIC 0.0578, RankICIR 0.231; net +6.53% IR 0.623, maxDD −8.0%, gross +11.41%). M2 Sharpe-drift edge confirmed on the compact set. | exp 33, run `c7c12228…` (mlflow exp 32), branch `exp/33-q01-m2-reproduction-add-spsharpe22-to-th` | yes — Q01 PASS |
+| EVIDENCE#023 | Q02 10-seed ensemble: breadth improves signal (RankIC 0.0671 vs 0.0579, RankICIR 0.259 vs 0.231, L/S Sharpe 4.58) but book stays negative net of cost (−0.93%, IR −0.089, maxDD −8.80%). | exp 34, run `ce49e4e0…` (mlflow exp 33), branch `exp/34-q02-seed10-10-seed-rankicensemble-vs-ref` | yes — Q02 FAIL (signal up, net down) |
+| EVIDENCE#024 | Q03 topk20: widening the book to 20 names cuts vol (std 0.0048 vs 0.0065) but adds no edge net of cost (−1.88%, IR −0.253, gross +0.64%, maxDD −8.80%). | exp 35, run `2a844c02…` (mlflow exp 34), branch `exp/35-q03-topk20-widen-topkdropout-portfolio-f` | yes — Q03 FAIL |
+| EVIDENCE#025 | Q04 10d label: strongest IC of label series (IC 0.0925, ICIR 0.422, RankIC 0.0960, L/S Sharpe 5.89) but does not survive daily-rebalance cost (−9.92% net, IR −1.152, gross −5.31%). | exp 36, run `ef211826…` (mlflow exp 35), branch `exp/36-q04-label10d-10d-forward-return-label-vs` | yes — Q04 FAIL (horizon signal, daily churn) |
+| EVIDENCE#026 | Q05 22d label: best signal of all 11 (IC 0.0970, ICIR 0.526, RankIC 0.1165, RankICIR 0.507, L/S Sharpe 8.35) but book flat gross (−0.03%) / negative net (−4.60%, IR −0.588). Horizon gains never monetize under daily turnover. | exp 37, run `daad5042…` (mlflow exp 36), branch `exp/37-q05-label22d-22d-forward-return-label-vs` | yes — Q05 FAIL |
+| EVIDENCE#027 | Q06 Fractional-Kelly sizing (cap_frac 0.5): turns negative book mildly positive (+1.04% net, IR 0.112, maxDD −7.13%) and trims drawdown below the 7.69% bar, but far below the 0.21 net-IR acceptance. | exp 38, run `afca4b80…` (mlflow exp 37), branch `exp/38-q06-kelly-sizing-score-magnitude-fractio` | yes — Q06 FAIL (below bar) |
+| EVIDENCE#028 | Q07 weekly rebalance: weekly recompute of the same daily signal is the campaign's best result — net +12.51% (IR 1.243), maxDD −4.13%, cost drag only ~1.1pp (gross +13.59%). Same IC/RankIC as exp 26. | exp 39, run `eb38588c…` (mlflow exp 38), branch `exp/39-q07-weekly-rebalance-recompute-topkdropo` | yes — Q07 PASS, wins chapter |
+| EVIDENCE#029 | Q08 risk-limit A/B on the exp-26 pred: gates bind ($5M floor drops DBA,DBC,ESPO,FDN,REM,TAN,UNG,XAR) but no IR edge — candidate IR 1.512 < baseline 1.580; drawdown cut (−0.65% vs −6.91%) is pure defunding (size_cap×conc folds risk_degree to ~0.0095, ~$9.5k deployed of $1M). exp-18's floor improvement NOT reproduced on clean data. | exp 40 (manual MLflow run `4667984187…`, mlflow exp 43 `tac-rd-q08-risklimit`), branch `exp/40-q08-risk-limit-ab-on-exp-26-reference-si`, `book/data/evidence/q08-risklimit/risk_calibration.json` | yes — Q08 REFUTED (safety net only) |
+| EVIDENCE#030 | Q09 long-short top10/bottom10: real pre-cost edge (gross +6.57%, IR 0.656) destroyed by daily L/S turnover — total_cost $96,721 (≈9.7% of $1M), 2485 trades/150d, fill rate 0.401; net −8.38%, IR −0.834, maxDD −11.22%. | exp 41, run `0647eadd…` (mlflow exp 39), branch `exp/41-q09-long-short-market-neutral-long-top-1` | yes — Q09 FAIL (turnover kills) |
+| EVIDENCE#031 | Q10 HMM regime entry gate (sp_hmm_p_regime1 ≥ 0.5 overlay): meets only the DD leg (−7.38% maxDD) — churns 276 trades/150d, cost ~6.3pp erases +2.02% gross; net −4.26%, IR −0.382. Regime-overlay hypothesis refuted. | exp 42, run `436acd01…` (mlflow exp 40), branch `exp/42-q10-hmm-regime-overlay-entry-gate-on-sph` | yes — Q10 FAIL |
+| EVIDENCE#032 | Q11 standalone 5d reversal (single feature sp_trend_slope_5): IC is slightly positive (+0.0023), so the model did NOT learn reversal — the pooled trend-slope reversal beta does not reproduce standalone. Gross −10.36%, net −15.22% (IR −1.572). Cost is not the culprit. | exp 43, run `e859adfe…` (mlflow exp 41), branch `exp/43-q11-standalone-5d-reversal-single-featur` | yes — Q11 FAIL (no reversal learned) |
 
 ## Live execution trail