CURRENT EXPERIMENT
Does governance improve autonomous trading?
- PAPERe3d-trade — two isolated paper books running side by side
- EXPERIMENTALe3d-corp → e3d-trade governance link — connected, mandate active
e3d-trade already ran continuously against live E3D signals in paper mode on its own judgment — five agents propose, deterministic code enforces every risk limit, real order submission stays off. That's still true. What's new: e3d-corp can now turn live E3D evidence into an investing Opportunity, draft a capital_mandate Proposal, require a human decision, and hand the approved mandate to e3d-trade — tagged and traceable end to end back through the same event log. We've stood up two identical paper books trading the same live signals over a predeclared window against a BTC-hold benchmark: one operates under an active governance mandate, the other doesn't. That comparison is running now, on simulated capital.
The rule was fixed before the link went live: e3d-trade exercises only the authority e3d-corp delegates to it, and a mandate can only tighten e3d-trade's own risk limits, never loosen them. We're not assuming governance improves autonomous systems. We're measuring whether it does — on paper capital, against a predeclared benchmark, before this touches anything real.