L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Design et création · SKILL.md

edge-signal-aggregator

edge-signal-aggregator

Aggregate and rank signals from multiple edge-finding skills (edge-candidate-agent, theme-detector, sector-analyst, institutional-flow-tracker) into a prioritized conviction dashboard with weighted scoring, deduplication, and contradiction detection.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: edge-signal-aggregator description: Aggregate and rank signals from multiple edge-finding skills (edge-candidate-agent, theme-detector, sector-analyst, institutional-flow-tracker) into a prioritized conviction dashboard with weighted scoring, deduplication, and contradiction detection.

Edge Signal Aggregator

Overview

Combine outputs from multiple upstream edge-finding skills into a single weighted conviction dashboard. This skill applies configurable signal weights, deduplicates overlapping themes, flags contradictions between skills, and ranks composite edge ideas by aggregate confidence score. The result is a prioritized edge shortlist with provenance links to each contributing skill.

When to Use

  • After running multiple edge-finding skills and wanting a unified view
  • When consolidating signals from edge-candidate-agent, theme-detector, sector-analyst, and institutional-flow-tracker
  • Before making portfolio allocation decisions based on multiple signal sources
  • To identify contradictions between different analysis approaches
  • When prioritizing which edge ideas deserve deeper research

Prerequisites

  • Python 3.9+
  • No API keys required (processes local JSON/YAML files from other skills)
  • Dependencies: pyyaml (standard in most environments)

Workflow

Step 1: Gather Upstream Skill Outputs

Collect output files from the upstream skills you want to aggregate:

  • reports/edge_candidate_*.json from edge-candidate-agent
  • reports/edge_concepts_*.yaml from edge-concept-synthesizer
  • reports/theme_detector_*.json from theme-detector
  • reports/sector_analyst_*.json from sector-analyst
  • reports/institutional_flow_*.json from institutional-flow-tracker
  • reports/edge_hints_*.yaml from edge-hint-extractor

Step 2: Run Signal Aggregation

Execute the aggregator script with paths to upstream outputs:

python3 skills/edge-signal-aggregator/scripts/aggregate_signals.py \
  --edge-candidates reports/edge_candidate_agent_*.json \
  --edge-concepts reports/edge_concepts_*.yaml \
  --themes reports/theme_detector_*.json \
  --sectors reports/sector_analyst_*.json \
  --institutional reports/institutional_flow_*.json \
  --hints reports/edge_hints_*.yaml \
  --output-dir reports/

Optional: Use a custom weights configuration:

python3 skills/edge-signal-aggregator/scripts/aggregate_signals.py \
  --edge-candidates reports/edge_candidate_agent_*.json \
  --weights-config skills/edge-signal-aggregator/assets/custom_weights.yaml \
  --output-dir reports/

Step 3: Review Aggregated Dashboard

Open the generated report to review:

  1. Ranked Edge Ideas - Sorted by composite conviction score
  2. Signal Provenance - Which skills contributed to each idea
  3. Contradictions - Conflicting signals flagged for manual review
  4. Deduplication Log - Merged overlapping themes

Step 4: Act on High-Conviction Signals

Filter the shortlist by minimum conviction threshold:

python3 skills/edge-signal-aggregator/scripts/aggregate_signals.py \
  --edge-candidates reports/edge_candidate_agent_*.json \
  --min-conviction 0.7 \
  --output-dir reports/

Output Format

JSON Report

{
  "schema_version": "1.1",
  "generated_at": "2026-03-02T07:00:00Z",
  "config": {
    "weights": {
      "edge_candidate_agent": 0.25,
      "edge_concept_synthesizer": 0.20,
      "theme_detector": 0.15,
      "sector_analyst": 0.15,
      "institutional_flow_tracker": 0.15,
      "edge_hint_extractor": 0.10
    },
    "min_conviction": 0.5,
    "dedup_similarity_threshold": 0.8
  },
  "summary": {
    "total_input_signals": 42,
    "unique_signals_after_dedup": 28,
    "contradictions_found": 3,
    "signals_above_threshold": 12,
    "invalid_signals_dropped": 2,
    "idempotency_check": {
      "total_input_signals": 42,
      "unique_evidence_ids": 28,
      "duplicate_copies_merged": 14,
      "independent_units_total": 30
    }
  },
  "ranked_signals": [
    {
      "rank": 1,
      "signal_id": "sig_001",
      "title": "AI Infrastructure Capex Acceleration",
      "composite_score": 0.87,
      "evidence_id": "ticket_2026-03-01_001",
      "score_scale_assumed": false,
      "contributing_skills": [
        {
          "skill": "edge_candidate_agent",
          "signal_ref": "ticket_2026-03-01_001",
          "raw_score": 0.92,
          "weighted_contribution": 0.23,
          "evidence_id": "ticket_2026-03-01_001",
          "event_fingerprint": "sha1-of-title-and-tickers"
        },
        {
          "skill": "theme_detector",
          "signal_ref": "theme_ai_infra",
          "raw_score": 0.85,
          "weighted_contribution": 0.13
        }
      ],
      "tickers": ["NVDA", "AMD", "AVGO"],
      "direction": "LONG",
      "time_horizon": "3-6 months",
      "confidence_breakdown": {
        "multi_skill_agreement": 0.30,
        "signal_strength": 0.35,
        "recency": 0.22
      }
    }
  ],
  "contradictions": [
    {
      "contradiction_id": "contra_001",
      "description": "Conflicting sector view on Energy",
      "skill_a": {
        "skill": "sector_analyst",
        "signal": "Energy sector bearish rotation",
        "direction": "SHORT"
      },
      "skill_b": {
        "skill": "institutional_flow_tracker",
        "signal": "Heavy institutional buying in XLE",
        "direction": "LONG"
      },
      "resolution_hint": "Check timeframe mismatch (short-term vs long-term)"
    }
  ],
  "deduplication_log": [
    {
      "merged_into": "edge_candidate_agent:ticket_001",
      "duplicates_removed": ["edge_candidate_agent:ticket_001@reports/ticket_001.json"],
      "similarity_score": 1.0,
      "reason": "same evidence re-ingested",
      "selection_rule": "newest timestamp wins; ties, missing, or unparsable timestamps keep the highest raw_score, then a stable key",
      "retained_copy": {
        "signal_ref": "ticket_001",
        "source_file": "reports/rerun.json",
        "raw_score": 0.5,
        "timestamp": "2026-10-10T00:00:00Z"
      },
      "discarded_copies": [
        {
          "signal_ref": "ticket_001",
          "source_file": "reports/ticket_001.json",
          "raw_score": 0.9,
          "timestamp": "2026-10-09T00:00:00Z"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "merged_into": "edge_candidate_agent:ticket_001",
      "duplicates_removed": ["theme_detector:ai_compute"],
      "similarity_score": 0.9
    }
  ],
  "invalid_signals": [
    {
      "skill": "theme_detector",
      "signal_ref": "broken_theme",
      "title": "Theme with a corrupted score",
      "reason": "non_finite",
      "declared_scale": null,
      "raw_value_repr": "nan",
      "source_file": "reports/theme_detector_2026-03-01.json"
    }
  ],
  "scale_assumptions_report": [
    {
      "skill": "theme_detector",
      "signal_ref": "ai_compute",
      "value": 7.2,
      "normalized_value": 0.072,
      "assumed_scale": "0-100",
      "source_file": "reports/theme_detector.json"
    }
  ]
}

Producer contract (optional keys, schema 1.1)

Each producer item (ticket, concept, theme, sector row, flow, hint) MAY carry:

  • evidence_id — a stable identifier for the underlying evidence. Without this key a deterministic fallback is derived from skill, signal reference, title, tickers, and direction (timestamps are excluded so refreshed timestamps cannot forge a new identity). Re-ingesting the same evidence (same skill + evidence_id) never adds a bonus: all copies collapse into one. When the copies differ, the newest observation wins: the copy with the latest timestamp, compared as parsed timezone-aware datetimes (date-only and naive values are read as UTC), becomes the retained score. Equal, missing, or unparsable timestamps fall back to the highest raw_score, then a stable key (signal_ref, source_file), so ingestion order never changes the result. Only ISO-8601 strings (or YYYY-MM-DD) are ordered; epoch numbers and compact forms such as 20261010 count as missing timestamps. Remaining full ties are broken by title, direction, tickers, and a canonical dump of the signal. A copy that carries a score older than the retained one is discarded, so a newer, lower score replaces an older, higher one. The discarded copies' scores and timestamps are listed in deduplication_log[].discarded_copies. Identical copies leave the score unchanged.
  • score_scale — "0-1" or "0-100", declaring the raw score's scale. Declared scales are enforced strictly: NaN/infinity/negative/out-of-range values are rejected into invalid_signals, never converted into maximum confidence. A present-but-unparsable declaration ("", "foo") is also rejected (missing_scale). If the key is absent, values in (1, 100] are divided by 100 and flagged score_scale_assumed: true plus a scale_assumptions_report entry (value is the original input, normalized_value the 0-1 score used); values > 100 are rejected.

Agreement rule (Issue #510)

Agreement bonuses fire on agreement_tier = min(distinct evidence_ids, distinct event_fingerprints, distinct skills) among a merged signal's contributors: tier 2 earns the two-skills bonus, tier 3+ the three-plus bonus. Re-ingested duplicates earn nothing; the same event restated by another skill (identical normalized title + tickers) counts once. Known limitation: the event fingerprint is vocabulary-based, so paraphrased restatements with disjoint word sets still earn the agreement bonus — treat cross-skill paraphrases with independent verification. Merged duplicates no longer earn a per-copy bonus (merge_bonus_per_duplicate is deprecated and ignored).

Markdown Report

The markdown report provides a human-readable dashboard:

# Edge Signal Aggregator Dashboard
**Generated:** 2026-03-02 07:00 UTC

## Summary
- Total Input Signals: 42
- Unique After Dedup: 28
- Contradictions: 3
- High Conviction (>=0.5): 12

## Top 10 Edge Ideas by Conviction

### 1. AI Infrastructure Capex Acceleration (Score: 0.87)
- **Tickers:** NVDA, AMD, AVGO
- **Direction:** LONG | **Horizon:** 3-6 months
- **Contributing Skills:**
  - edge-candidate-agent: 0.92 (ticket_2026-03-01_001)
  - theme-detector: 0.85 (theme_ai_infra)
- **Confidence Breakdown:** Agreement 0.30 | Strength 0.35 | Recency 0.22

...

## Contradictions Requiring Review

### Energy Sector Conflict
- **sector-analyst:** Bearish rotation (SHORT)
- **institutional-flow-tracker:** Heavy buying XLE (LONG)
- **Hint:** Check timeframe mismatch

## Deduplication Summary
- 14 signals merged into 8 unique themes
- Average similarity of merged signals: 0.89

Reports are saved to reports/ with filenames:

  • edge_signal_aggregator_YYYY-MM-DD_HHMMSS.json
  • edge_signal_aggregator_YYYY-MM-DD_HHMMSS.md

Resources

  • scripts/aggregate_signals.py -- Main aggregation script with CLI interface
  • references/signal-weighting-framework.md -- Rationale for default weights and scoring methodology
  • assets/default_weights.yaml -- Default skill weights configuration

Key Principles

  1. Provenance Tracking -- Every aggregated signal links back to its source skill and original reference
  2. Contradiction Transparency -- Conflicting signals are flagged, not hidden, to enable informed decisions
  3. Configurable Weights -- Default weights reflect typical reliability but can be customized per user
  4. Deduplication Without Loss -- Merged signals retain references to all original sources
  5. Actionable Output -- Ranked list with clear tickers, direction, and time horizon for each idea
  6. Idempotent Aggregation -- Re-ingesting the same evidence never inflates scores; agreement credit requires distinct skills AND distinct events
  7. Strict Score Validation -- NaN/infinity, negative, and out-of-range scores are rejected and reported, never converted into maximum confidence
Skills enregistrées