01 / contextGive evidence a name and a source
Adapters and conviction builders represent regime, positioning, orderflow, calendar, and historical context as inspectable inputs.
Convex · source adaptersMeridian00
Meridian
Make conviction inspectable.
Public project surface / Meridian
The public face of Meridian leads with auditable reasoning, explicit gates, and operator control. Its private-desk positioning frames the research prototype.
I designed and built Meridian around a question that gets lost in a busy trading desk: what, exactly, supports this decision? The research prototype connects a ranked signal, its contributing evidence, and a structured review path. It explores the interface and engineering of judgment; its demo values are not a trading record.
RoleProduct design + engineering
AudienceDiscretionary traders
FocusExplainable convictionsignal → evidence → review
StageResearch prototypedemo interface · paper-only safety work
01
The consequential problem
The number arrives before the explanation
A confidence score can hide the most important part of a decision.
A trader moves between price structure, market regime, positioning, events, and risk. Compressing those inputs into a ranked list is useful for scanning, but the ranking alone cannot explain which inputs agreed, which conflicted, or what should stop the next step.
Meridian needed to stay calm enough to scan while retaining enough structure to interrogate a single idea. The design problem was connecting those two levels of attention.
- Keep a signal’s explanation attached to the signal.
- Expose contributions and concerns alongside the headline score.
- Treat review and execution as different states.
02
What I saw
A score should open a conversation
Conviction becomes useful when its ingredients remain visible.
I treated the score as an entry point into evidence. A conviction stack shows each source, score, weight, and contribution. A connected decision graph then puts those inputs into a sequence: trigger, confirmation, validation, context, and execution. Selecting a node can lead back to the evidence that contributed to it.
03
The decision that changed the system
Progressive detail, continuous context
Build one review path from the desk to the underlying evidence.
The interface moves from Pulse to a signal, deeper analysis, and a structured plan. Tabs, signal identity, and analysis state live in the URL, making a particular view addressable and recoverable. Configurable conviction weights expose the calculation instead of making the ranking feel untouchable. A separate paper-only engineering iteration adds evidence checks before any broker-paper dispatch can become eligible.
01Scan the desk
A compact signal card brings direction, conviction, risk, and plan context into the first read.
02Inspect the inputs
Open the conviction stack and follow a decision node back to its contributing evidence.
03Review the plan
Keep entry, stop, target, and size explicit before a consequential next step.
04Retain the context
Signal and order references connect the operating model to searchable memory and review.
04
System anatomy / rationale / surfaces
The explanation has a structure
Source context, scoring, interaction, and authority each have a place.
The implemented application uses a JavaScript web stack and Convex domain models. The research and paper-safety work remain distinct from a validated strategy or a production trading operation.
Decision anatomy / select a knot
Pressure did not decorate the architecture. It determined it.
Before / tension
A ranked signal can look decisive while hiding the contribution of each input.
The knot / decision
Show a weighted conviction stack with source-level scores, weights, and contributions; make local weights configurable.
After / consequence
The ranking becomes an inspectable research model rather than a claim of certainty.
02 / reasoningShow how the score is assembled
Weighted conviction, individual contributions, and linked decision nodes make the ranking open to inspection.
JavaScript scoring · decision graph03 / surfaceCarry one signal through the review
Addressable views connect desk scanning, signal detail, analysis, and plan fields across desktop and mobile layouts.
Next.js · React · Lightweight Charts04 / authoritySeparate demo behavior from paper readiness
A local paper-safety branch checks strategy-bound evidence, account identity, and broker acknowledgements. Live execution is explicitly disabled in that branch.
Node.js · IBKR adapter · evidence gatesArchitecture rationale / pressure → choice → consequence
PressureDecisionWhy it mattered
One score conceals disagreementExpose source weights and individual contributions
A researcher can inspect the calculation and see what the number depends on.
Drill-down navigation loses the original ideaCarry signal and view identity in the URL
Moving between summary and detail preserves a recoverable review context.
A polished demo can imply execution readinessKeep paper validation behind separate evidence and broker gates
Interface completeness cannot silently become authority to dispatch.
Surface atlas
The system becomes tangible through the places people encounter and use it.
Pulse + signals
A compact first read of candidates, directional context, and conviction.
Signal analysis
Source-level conviction, concerns, and connected decision paths.
Plan + operations
Structured plan fields alongside separate approval, order, and memory surfaces.
Paper evidence
Local journals and runtime checks that keep demo, paper readiness, and live authority distinct.
Interface
Next.js · React · Tailwind CSS · Framer Motion
Visual analysis
Lightweight Charts · decision graphs · weighted conviction
Data + services
Convex · PostgreSQL / TimescaleDB · Node.js · IBKR integration
Technology atlas / select a tool
The tools behind the decisions.
Select a tool to see the role it plays in this system.
- Product / Meridian
Next.js
The public introduction and research application share a web delivery framework and route structure.
05
Authentic proof
Public UI preview / example data
The existing public preview places the signal and its plan fields together. The displayed scores, prices, size, and risk are illustrative demo values, not execution or performance evidence.
06
What changed in my operating model
Explanation is part of the product
A convincing interface must leave room for an unconvincing hypothesis.
Meridian taught me to design the path for scrutiny as carefully as the first impression. A clean chart or confident score can help someone orient, but the product earns a second look when the inputs, disagreements, and stopping conditions remain available.
The work remains a research prototype. The lasting design lesson is that better presentation should make uncertainty easier to examine, and never turn a demo into an implied claim about real-world outcomes.
- Make a summary expandable into its evidence.
- Keep context intact across changes in depth.
- Let an honest stop be a complete product state.