ARTEMIS: A Neuro Symbolic Framework for Economically Constrained Market Dynamics
Organizations: Department of Electronics and Electrical Engineering, BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Abstract
Deep learning models in quantitative finance often operate as black boxes, lacking interpretability and failing to incorporate fundamental economic principles such as no-arbitrage constraints. This paper introduces ARTEMIS (Arbitrage-free Representation Through Economic Models and Interpretable Symbolics), a novel neuro-symbolic framework combining a continuous-time Laplace Neural Operator encoder, a neural stochastic differential equation regularised by physics-informed losses, and a differentiable symbolic bottleneck that distils interpretable trading rules. The model enforces economic plausibility via two novel regularisation terms: a Feynman-Kac PDE residual penalising local no-arbitrage violations, and a market price of risk penalty bounding the instantaneous Sharpe ratio. We evaluate ARTEMIS against six strong baselines on four datasets: Jane Street, Optiver, Time-IMM, and DSLOB (a synthetic crash regime). Results demonstrate ARTEMIS achieves state-of-the-art directional accuracy, outperforming all baselines on DSLOB (64.96%) and Time-IMM (96.0%). A comprehensive ablation study confirms each component's contribution: removing the PDE loss reduces directional accuracy from 64.89% to 50.32%. Underperformance on Optiver is attributed to its long sequence length and volatility-focused target. By providing interpretable, economically grounded predictions, ARTEMIS bridges the gap between deep learning's power and the transparency demanded in quantitative finance.
Figures & tables
| Dataset | Task | #Feat | SeqLen | #Train | #Val | #Test | Notes |
| Jane Street | Regression | 79 | 20 | 7.37M | 4.61M | 200k | Streamed Kaggle data; grouped by (symbol,date); masked missing values; predict next-step responder_6. |
| Optiver | Volatility (log) | 7 | 600 | 2,298 | 766 | 766 | 10-min LOB + trades; forward-filled to 1Hz; derived features; target log-transformed. |
| Time-IMM | Temperature | 4 | 24 | 29,470 | 6,317 | 6,319 | Hourly EPA air quality; forward/backward fill for sparse variables; predict next hour temp. |
| DSLOB | Realized volatility (regression) | 85 | 20 | 24,891 | 9,891 | 4,891 | Synthetic LOB dataset based on real crash regime; 85 features from four levels (prices, sizes, spreads, imbalances); target is next-step realized volatility (log-transformed). |
| Dataset | Model | RMSE | RankIC | DirAcc | Weighted R 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jane Street Desai et al. (2024) | LSTM | 0.7628 | 0.0378 | 0.5159 | 0.0020 |
| Transformer | 0.7635 | 0.0122 | 0.5337 | -0.0002 | |
| NS-Transformer | 2.6034 | 0.0031 | 0.5009 | ||
| Informer | 0.7862 | 0.0083 | 0.4739 | -0.0008 | |
| ARTEMIS | 0.7762 | 0.0432 | 0.5150 | -0.0009 | |
| Chronos-2 | 1.4043 | 0.1325 | 0.5372 | -1.4578 |
| Variant | RMSE | DirAcc | RankIC | Weighted R 2 | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A0_Full | 0.2666 | 0.6489 | -0.0590 | -767.9 | Best directional accuracy – primary goal in trading. |
| A1_NoSDE | 0.0224 | 0.6459 | -0.0752 | -4.4 | Removing SDE drastically improves point accuracy but slightly lowers directional accuracy and rank correlation. |
| A2_NoPDE | 0.0723 | 0.5032 | -0.0471 | -55.5 | PDE loss is essential for directional signal (drops from 64.9% to 50.3%). |
| A3_NoMPR | 0.0685 | 0.5682 | -0.0224 | -49.7 | MPR loss helps directional accuracy (64.9% vs 56.8%) but slightly harms rank. |
| A4_NoPhysics | 0.0399 | 0.4177 | 0.0306 | -16.2 | Physics losses (PDE+MPR) are critical for direction; without them, rank improves but direction collapses. |
| A5_NoConsistency | 0.1529 | 0.3754 | -0.0557 | -252.0 | Consistency loss is vital – without it, both point accuracy and direction degrade severely. |
Quantitative Finance
Quantitative finance uses mathematical models, statistics, and machine learning to value assets, measure risk, and guide trading and portfolio decisions.
See all 191 papers