Do the old quiet ones hold their depth better over half a day?

Do the old quiet ones hold their depth better over half a day?

A measurement on a token older than seven days, holding at least $10,000 of liquidity and trading under a quarter of it per hour, is followed twelve hours later by liquidity still at 80% of its level more often than a measurement found through the same feed on a token that is not quiet.

token-measurement cohort comparison. Exposure is the trigger condition evaluated on a 6h trailing window; the outcome is 'liquidity still at 80% of its level' read strictly 12h later — hours of clock time, resolved against the measurement timestamps. Rates are compared pooled and within each sampling frame with a two-proportion z-test, then re-checked on a chronological split.

strata

"frame"

window_hours

6

horizon_hours

12

min_effect_pp

10

min_window_points

4

One side of the comparison is empty (0 exposed, 20 control), so there is nothing to compare.

n_control

20

n_exposed

0

One group is empty; nothing was compared. Measurements come from only 0 tokens; consecutive readings of the same token are correlated, so the effective sample is far smaller than the row count. 1023 tokens were excluded for short series and 149 readings had nothing 12h later. Tokens that died early are exactly the ones that run out of series, so the sample leans toward survivors. Exposure is defined by the same detector that surfaced the anomaly, so the hypothesis and its test share a definition. An independent trigger would be stronger. The comparison is held within sampling frames, which the hypothesis does not declare as a control, or no sampling frame held rows on both sides. One half of the period had no comparable rows, so stability is untested.

version

critic-checks-v1

stability

NEEDS_MORE_DATA

confounding

NEEDS_MORE_DATA

sample_size

FAIL

data_leakage

PASS

data_quality

PASS

independence

NEEDS_MORE_DATA

selection_bias

NEEDS_MORE_DATA

look_ahead_bias

PASS

multiple_testing

PASS

survivorship_bias

NEEDS_MORE_DATA

one empty group

1. 05:30:00OBSERVATIONKORI: buy share 52% against a 34% baseline; 470.7 days old, $448,735 liquidity, volume only 1.5% of it
2. 05:30:00ANOMALYTOKEN_SURVIVAL_ANOMALY score=0.95 [survival-quiet-v1]
3. 05:30:00MEMORY_SEARCH20 related memories retrieved before writing the hypothesis (vector-cosine/pgvector)
4. 05:30:00HYPOTHESIS#2 Do the old quiet ones hold their depth better over half a day?
5. 12:50:34DATASET20 measurements over 1 tokens; hash e40cbd71438d…
6. 12:50:34EXPERIMENT#000002 quiet-survivor-frame-12h
7. 12:50:35CRITICFAIL: One group is empty; nothing was compared. Measurements come from only 0 tokens; consecutive readings of the same token are correlated, so the effective sample is far smaller than the row count. 1023 tokens were excluded for short series and 149 readings had nothing 12h later. Tokens that died early are exactly the ones that run out of series, so the sample leans toward survivors. Exposure is defined by the same detector that surfaced the anomaly, so the hypothesis and its test share a definition. An independent trigger would be stronger. The comparison is held within sampling frames, which the hypothesis does not declare as a control, or no sampling frame held rows on both sides. One half of the period had no comparable rows, so stability is untested.
8. 12:50:35RESULTOne side of the comparison is empty (0 exposed, 20 control), so there is nothing to compare.
9. 12:50:35MEMORY_UPDATEresult stored: quiet-survivor-frame-12h: inconclusive