# analyst89 Feature Engineering Analysis Report

**Dataset**: analyst89
**Region**: EUR
**Delay**: 1


**Dataset**: analyst89
**Category**: Analyst
**Region**: EUR
**Analysis Date**: 2024-01-15
**Fields Analyzed**: 2

---

## Executive Summary

**Primary Question Answered by Dataset**: What financial metrics are being reported by global entities and how do these fundamental values evolve across fiscal reporting periods?

**Key Insights from Analysis**:
- Vector-based data structure allows simultaneous analysis of multiple financial metrics or historical fiscal periods within a single instrument record
- Temporal alignment is explicitly provided through fiscal period end dates, enabling precise time-series construction
- The combination of values and periods enables both cross-sectional and time-series fundamental analysis
- Data sparsity and irregular fiscal calendars are inherent challenges requiring careful handling

**Critical Field Relationships Identified**:
- Temporal Dependency: data_item_value derives meaning primarily through association with fiscal_period_end (values without temporal context are uninterpretable)
- Vector Coherence: Elements within the data_item_value vector are presumed to represent comparable financial quantities (e.g., different metrics for same period, or same metric across periods)

**Most Promising Feature Concepts**:
1. **Fiscal Growth Trajectory** - captures year-over-year fundamental momentum, essential for growth investing strategies
2. **Fundamental Outlier Detection** - identifies statistical anomalies in financial performance that may signal inflection points
3. **Reporting Continuity Essence** - measures corporate transparency through reporting regularity, potentially indicating governance quality

---

## Dataset Deep Understanding

### Dataset Description
Global financial database containing vectorized financial data items and their corresponding fiscal reporting period end dates. The dataset enables analysis of corporate financial performance across time, supporting both value and growth oriented investment strategies through fundamental metric tracking.

### Field Inventory
| Field ID | Description | Data Type | Update Frequency | Coverage |
|----------|-------------|-----------|------------------|----------|
| anl89_data_item_value | data item value | Vector | Monthly (Fiscal) | Varies by item |
| anl89_fiscal_period_end | Reporting period (month end) | Vector | Monthly | Varies by reporting |

### Field Deconstruction Analysis

#### anl89_data_item_value: Financial Data Item Values
- **What is being measured?**: Quantitative financial metrics (potentially including earnings, revenue, book value, cash flow, or other fundamental accounting measures) reported by corporate entities
- **How is it measured?**: Stored as vector data allowing multiple simultaneous values per instrument per observation date (enabling multi-metric or multi-period storage)
- **Time dimension**: Values are anchored to specific fiscal period end dates; measurement reflects historical realized or estimated future performance
- **Business context**: Provides the raw quantitative inputs for valuation models, ratio analysis, and fundamental screening in equity research
- **Generation logic**: Derived from corporate financial statements (10-K, 10-Q filings) or analyst consensus estimates; subject to accounting standards (GAAP/IFRS) and potential restatements
- **Reliability considerations**: Vector elements may have heterogeneous coverage; missing values (NaN) may represent data collection lag, non-applicable metrics, or reporting omissions; potential for look-ahead bias if estimates mixed with actuals

#### anl89_fiscal_period_end: Fiscal Period End Dates
- **What is being measured?**: Calendar dates marking the conclusion of fiscal reporting periods (typically month-end dates)
- **How is it measured?**: Vector format allowing multiple period markers per observation
- **Time dimension**: Represents the temporal structure of corporate reporting calendars; may follow standard quarterly cycles or company-specific fiscal years
- **Business context**: Essential for aligning financial data temporally, calculating year-over-year comparisons, and detecting reporting delays or fiscal year changes
- **Generation logic**: Determined by company fiscal year definitions (e.g., retail often ends January, government September); captured from official filing deadlines
- **Reliability considerations**: Generally reliable for established issuers; irregular spacing may indicate acquisitions, divestitures, or fiscal year changes; international differences in fiscal year conventions

### Field Relationship Mapping

**The Story This Data Tells**:
This dataset narrates the evolution of corporate financial health through quantified metrics tied to specific temporal milestones. It reveals not just what financial values exist, but when they were measured, enabling analysis of growth trajectories, seasonal patterns, and the reliability of corporate reporting cadences. The vector structure suggests a rich, multi-dimensional view of fundamentals where relationships between different financial quantities or their evolution through time can be simultaneously analyzed.

**Key Relationships Identified**:
1. **Temporal Anchoring**: Each element in data_item_value is semantically linked to corresponding elements in fiscal_period_end; changes in value must be interpreted relative to their period timing
2. **Reporting Cadence**: The sequence of fiscal_period_end dates reveals the company's reporting frequency (annual, semi-annual, quarterly) and any structural changes to fiscal calendars
3. **Data Freshness**: The relationship between observation date and fiscal_period_end indicates information latency—how stale the most recent fundamental data is

**Missing Pieces That Would Complete the Picture**:
- Specific metadata identifying which financial metric each vector element represents (e.g., EPS vs Revenue vs Book Value)
- Currency denomination and conversion factors for cross-border comparisons
- Flags distinguishing actual reported data from analyst estimates or preliminary results
- Revision history tracking changes to previously reported values

---

## Feature Concepts by Question Type

### Q1: "What is stable?" (Invariance Features)

**Concept**: Financial Metric Stability Score
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Coefficient of variation (standard deviation divided by absolute mean) of financial values over a rolling window, measuring the stability of fundamental performance
- **Why This Feature**: Identifies companies with predictable, stable operations versus those with volatile or cyclical financial results; stable fundamentals often indicate mature businesses or competitive moats
- **Logical Meaning**: The relative variability of financial performance over time; quantifies business model stability
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, use ts_backfill to ensure continuous time series before calculating statistics, as missing data points would bias volatility calculations
- **Directionality**: Low values (near 0) indicate stable, predictable financial performance; high values indicate volatility, cyclicality, or operational instability
- **Boundary Conditions**: Value of 0 indicates perfectly constant financial performance (rare, potentially suspicious); values >1 indicate high volatility relative to mean, potentially signaling distress or cyclical exposure
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_std_dev(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 63) / abs(ts_mean(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 63))`

**Concept**: Reporting Period Regularity Index
- **Sample Fields Used**: fiscal_period_end
- **Definition**: Standard deviation of the day-differences between consecutive fiscal period ends, measuring the consistency of reporting intervals
- **Why This Feature**: Regular reporting cadence indicates organizational discipline and transparency; irregular intervals may signal acquisitions, divestitures, accounting delays, or governance issues
- **Logical Meaning**: The consistency of corporate reporting calendar timing; deviations from regular quarterly or annual cycles
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, gaps in fiscal period data would create artificial irregularity; use ts_backfill to maintain continuity
- **Directionality**: Low values indicate regular, predictable reporting schedules (positive governance signal); high values indicate erratic reporting (potential red flag)
- **Boundary Conditions**: 0 indicates perfectly regular reporting (e.g., exact 90-day quarters); values >30 suggest significant scheduling irregularities or fiscal year changes
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_std_dev(days_from_last_change(vec_avg({fiscal_period_end})), 126)`

---

### Q2: "What is changing?" (Dynamics Features)

**Concept**: Fiscal Growth Trajectory
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Year-over-year percentage change in average financial values, capturing the momentum of fundamental performance
- **Why This Feature**: Growth in financial metrics (earnings, revenue) is a primary driver of equity returns; this feature quantifies the direction and magnitude of fundamental momentum
- **Logical Meaning**: The rate of change in corporate financial performance, indicating expansion, contraction, or stagnation
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, ensure continuous series using ts_backfill to calculate accurate year-over-year changes; missing data would create spurious growth rates
- **Directionality**: Positive values indicate growing financial performance (bullish fundamental signal); negative values indicate decline (bearish); magnitude indicates speed of change
- **Boundary Conditions**: Extreme positive values may indicate recovery from depressed base or acquisition-driven growth; extreme negative values may indicate write-downs, recessions, or business deterioration
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_delta(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 252) / abs(ts_delay(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 252))`

**Concept**: Reporting Calendar Drift
- **Sample Fields Used**: fiscal_period_end
- **Definition**: Change in fiscal period end timing compared to the same period one year prior, detecting fiscal year shifts or reporting delays
- **Why This Feature**: Changes in fiscal year-end can indicate mergers, acquisitions, or attempts to mask seasonality; persistent delays in reporting may signal accounting difficulties
- **Logical Meaning**: Shifts in corporate fiscal calendar alignment; measures deviations from historical reporting timing
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, fiscal periods must be continuously tracked to detect drift accurately
- **Directionality**: Positive values indicate reporting is occurring later than historical norms (potential delay); negative values indicate earlier reporting; large absolute values suggest fiscal year changes
- **Boundary Conditions**: Values near 0 indicate consistent fiscal calendar; values >30 or <-30 indicate fiscal year-end changes; gradual drift may indicate creeping delays
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_delta(vec_avg({fiscal_period_end}), 252)`

---

### Q3: "What is anomalous?" (Deviation Features)

**Concept**: Fundamental Outlier Detection
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Z-score measuring how many standard deviations the current value deviates from its 2-year historical mean
- **Why This Feature**: Extreme deviations in financial metrics often precede mean reversion or signal fundamental inflection points (earnings surprises, write-downs); identifies statistical outliers requiring investigation
- **Logical Meaning**: The unusualness of current financial performance relative to historical operating norms; statistical extremity of current fundamentals
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, use ts_backfill to ensure robust historical statistics; outliers in sparse data are not meaningful
- **Directionality**: High positive values indicate exceptionally strong performance (potential overvaluation or genuine improvement); high negative values indicate exceptionally poor performance (potential distress or temporary setback); near zero indicates normal range
- **Boundary Conditions**: |z-score| > 3 considered statistically extreme (99.7% confidence); values >5 suggest data errors or catastrophic events; persistent high values suggest structural regime change rather than anomaly
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_av_diff(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 504) / ts_std_dev(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 504)`

**Concept**: Reporting Gap Anomaly
- **Sample Fields Used**: fiscal_period_end
- **Definition**: Days elapsed since the last fiscal period end compared to the expected reporting frequency (detecting delayed filings)
- **Why This Feature**: Unusually long gaps between reports often precede bad news or accounting restatements; early detection of reporting delays provides informational edge
- **Logical Meaning**: Unusual latency in financial reporting; deviation from expected reporting schedule
- **is filling nan necessary**: No, NaN values in this context represent missing reports which are themselves the anomaly signal; filling would obscure the information content
- **Directionality**: High values indicate delayed reporting (negative governance signal); values near expected cycle length (90 for quarterly) indicate normal reporting
- **Boundary Conditions**: Values >120 for quarterly reporters suggest significant delay; values >180 suggest potential delinquency or material accounting issues
- **Implementation Example**: `days_from_last_change(vec_avg({fiscal_period_end}))`

---

### Q4: "What is combined?" (Interaction Features)

**Concept**: Value-Period Alignment Quality
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value, fiscal_period_end
- **Definition**: Time-series correlation between financial value magnitude and fiscal period recency, detecting trends or seasonality in reporting
- **Why This Feature**: Strong correlation indicates trending fundamentals (growth or decline); weak correlation suggests stable or seasonal business; helps distinguish trend from noise
- **Logical Meaning**: The relationship between timing and financial performance magnitude; indicates whether recent periods systematically differ from past periods
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, both series must be aligned and complete for correlation calculation; use ts_backfill on both fields
- **Directionality**: Positive correlation indicates financial values are increasing over time (growth trend); negative indicates decline; near zero indicates no time-based trend (stable or purely seasonal)
- **Boundary Conditions**: Correlation near 1 or -1 indicates strong deterministic trend; values near 0 suggest mean-reverting or seasonal patterns; breakdown in correlation may indicate business model shifts
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_corr(vec_avg({data_item_value}), vec_avg({fiscal_period_end}), 252)`

**Concept**: Cross-Metric Dispersion
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Standard deviation across vector elements (diversity of financial metrics within the observation), measuring internal consistency of financial performance
- **Why This Feature**: High dispersion may indicate unbalanced financial health (e.g., high revenue but negative earnings); low dispersion suggests consistent performance across metrics; identifies quality of earnings vs accounting anomalies
- **Logical Meaning**: Internal divergence between different financial metrics or periods; measures whether all financial indicators tell a consistent story
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, use vec_filter to remove NaN elements before calculating dispersion to avoid bias from missing data
- **Directionality**: High values indicate divergent signals from different financial metrics (mixed quality); low values indicate consistent performance across metrics (high quality); zero indicates all metrics equal (rare, potentially suspicious)
- **Boundary Conditions**: 0 indicates perfect uniformity; extremely high values relative to mean suggest volatile or inconsistent business performance
- **Implementation Example**: `vec_stddev({data_item_value})`

---

### Q5: "What is structural?" (Composition Features)

**Concept**: Fiscal Period Concentration
- **Sample Fields Used**: fiscal_period_end
- **Definition**: Information entropy of fiscal period end distribution over a lookback window, measuring how concentrated or dispersed reporting dates are
- **Why This Feature**: Companies with off-calendar fiscal years (e.g., retail ending January) exhibit different seasonality; high concentration in specific months may indicate industry clustering or tax-driven fiscal year selection
- **Logical Meaning**: Distribution pattern of fiscal year-ends; indicates whether reporting is clustered in specific calendar periods or uniformly distributed
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, entropy calculation requires complete observation set; filter invalid dates
- **Directionality**: Low entropy indicates concentrated fiscal year-ends (industry clustering); high entropy indicates dispersed reporting (diverse fiscal calendars)
- **Boundary Conditions**: 0 indicates all observations share the same fiscal month-end; maximum entropy indicates uniform distribution across all 12 months
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_entropy(vec_avg({fiscal_period_end}), 63)`

**Concept**: Vector Value Distribution Skew
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Skewness of the vector elements measuring asymmetry in the distribution of financial metrics (frequency of extreme positive vs negative values)
- **Why This Feature**: Positive skew suggests occasional large gains (option-like payoff structure); negative skew suggests risk of large losses (left-tail risk); important for risk management and valuation
- **Logical Meaning**: Asymmetry in financial performance distribution; indicates whether extreme outcomes are more likely to be positive or negative
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, filter NaN values to ensure accurate skewness calculation
- **Directionality**: Positive skew indicates right-tail heavy distribution (occasional large positive outcomes); negative skew indicates left-tail heavy (occasional large losses); near zero indicates symmetric distribution
- **Boundary Conditions**: Skewness >1 or <-1 indicates significant asymmetry; extreme values (>3) suggest non-normal distribution requiring careful interpretation
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_skewness(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 252)`

---

### Q6: "What is cumulative?" (Accumulation Features)

**Concept**: Trailing Financial Accumulation
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Cumulative sum of financial values over recent fiscal periods (e.g., trailing 12-month equivalent)
- **Why This Feature**: Aggregates financial performance over business cycles, smoothing seasonal effects; essential for metrics that accumulate over time (revenue, earnings TTM)
- **Logical Meaning**: Total financial performance accumulated over the lookback window; represents the "stock" of recent financial achievement
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, ensure no gaps in the accumulation window; use ts_backfill to maintain continuity, as gaps create artificial reductions in cumulative values
- **Directionality**: Higher values indicate greater accumulated financial performance; sign depends on metric (revenue always positive, earnings may be negative)
- **Boundary Conditions**: Values should generally increase with window length for positive metrics; declining cumulative sums indicate negative recent performance
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_sum(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 63)`

**Concept**: Fiscal Data Richness
- **Sample Fields Used**: fiscal_period_end
- **Definition**: Count of unique, valid fiscal period ends within the lookback window, measuring data availability and reporting frequency
- **Why This Feature**: Data richness affects statistical reliability of all other features; sparse data indicates limited history, recent IPOs, or delisting risk
- **Logical Meaning**: The density of historical data points available for analysis; proxy for corporate maturity and information transparency
- **is filling nan necessary**: No, NaN counting is explicitly the mechanism to measure data sparsity; filling would obscure the information content
- **Directionality**: Higher values indicate rich data history (better statistical reliability); lower values indicate sparse data (higher estimation uncertainty)
- **Boundary Conditions**: 0 indicates no data; expected ~4 for quarterly reporters over 1 year; values significantly below expected indicate reporting gaps or recent listing/delisting
- **Implementation Example**: `252 - ts_count_nans(vec_avg({fiscal_period_end}), 252)`

---

### Q7: "What is relative?" (Comparison Features)

**Concept**: Historical Percentile Position
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Current value's position within the historical range (min to max) over a 2-year window, normalized to 0-1 scale
- **Why This Feature**: Contextualizes current performance relative to the company's own historical operating range; identifies extreme high or low fundamental periods
- **Logical Meaning**: Relative standing of current financial metrics within historical distribution; indicates whether current performance is historically strong, weak, or average
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, historical range calculation requires complete data; backfill missing values to avoid artificial range expansion
- **Directionality**: Values near 1 indicate historically high performance (potential mean reversion risk or structural improvement); values near 0 indicate historically low performance (potential recovery or distress); 0.5 indicates median performance
- **Boundary Conditions**: 0 = 2-year minimum, 1 = 2-year maximum; values persistently near extremes may indicate regime change rather than cyclicality
- **Implementation Example**: `(vec_avg({data_item_value}) - ts_min(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 504)) / (ts_max(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 504) - ts_min(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 504))`

**Concept**: Recency Weighted Valuation
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Ratio of exponentially weighted recent average to simple historical average, emphasizing recent vs older financial performance
- **Why This Feature**: Recent financial performance often has higher predictive power for near-term stock returns; this feature identifies whether recent fundamentals are improving or deteriorating relative to the historical trend
- **Logical Meaning**: The bias of recent financial performance relative to longer-term history; indicates acceleration or deceleration in fundamentals
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, backfill to ensure the exponential decay calculation has continuous input
- **Directionality**: Values >1 indicate recent performance is above historical average (positive momentum); values <1 indicate recent underperformance relative to history (negative momentum); 1 indicates stable trend
- **Boundary Conditions**: Extreme values indicate significant inflection points; sustained values >1.5 or <0.5 suggest structural business changes
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_decay_exp_window(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 63, factor=0.5) / ts_mean(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 252)`

---

### Q8: "What is essential?" (Essence Features)

**Concept**: Fundamental Persistence
- **Sample Fields Used**: data_item_value
- **Definition**: Time-series autocorrelation (correlation between current values and lagged values from one quarter prior), measuring the persistence of financial performance
- **Why This Feature**: High persistence indicates sustainable competitive advantages or sticky business models (quality factor); low persistence indicates mean-reverting or cyclical businesses; essential for distinguishing temporary vs permanent earnings
- **Logical Meaning**: Serial correlation of fundamental metrics; the degree to which past financial performance predicts future performance
- **is filling nan necessary**: Yes, continuous series required for autocorrelation calculation; gaps break the temporal dependency structure
- **Directionality**: High positive values (near 1) indicate persistent fundamentals (quality, momentum in earnings); near 0 indicates unpredictable fundamentals; negative values indicate mean-reverting fundamentals (contrarian signal)
- **Boundary Conditions**: 1 = perfectly persistent (random walk with drift); 0 = no persistence (white noise); negative = reversal pattern; values >0.7 suggest high-quality stable business
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_corr(vec_avg({data_item_value}), ts_delay(vec_avg({data_item_value}), 63), 252)`

**Concept**: Reporting Continuity Essence
- **Sample Fields Used**: fiscal_period_end
- **Definition**: Average days between consecutive valid fiscal period ends, measuring the fundamental reporting cadence of the entity
- **Why This Feature**: The reporting frequency (quarterly vs annual) and regularity are fundamental characteristics of corporate transparency; this captures the essence of information flow velocity from the company to investors
- **Logical Meaning**: The intrinsic pace of financial disclosure; a measure of information generation and transparency frequency
- **is filling nan necessary**: No, gaps in reporting are meaningful and should not be filled; they represent periods of opacity
- **Directionality**: Lower values (~90) indicate frequent quarterly reporting (high transparency); higher values (~365) indicate annual reporting (low transparency); irregular values indicate inconsistent disclosure
- **Boundary Conditions**: 30 = monthly reporting (unusual for financials, common for operational metrics); 90 = standard quarterly; 365 = annual; >400 indicates skipped reporting periods
- **Implementation Example**: `ts_mean(days_from_last_change(vec_avg({fiscal_period_end})), 252)`

---

## Implementation Considerations

### Data Quality Notes
- **Coverage**: Vector fields may have heterogeneous coverage across different financial metrics; some elements may be sparse for certain instruments
- **Timeliness**: Fiscal period ends indicate the vintage of data; alignment between observation date and fiscal_period_end indicates data freshness (delay=1 mitigates look-ahead)
- **Accuracy**: Vector data requires careful validation that elements are comparable (e.g., not mixing currencies or units); fiscal period alignment must be verified to avoid comparing Q1 to Q4 incorrectly
- **Potential Biases**: Survivorship bias in historical fiscal data; larger companies tend to have more complete vector coverage; international differences in fiscal year conventions may create clustering effects

### Computational Complexity
- **Lightweight features**: Historical percentile position, reporting gap anomaly (single operators)
- **Medium complexity**: Fiscal growth trajectory, fundamental persistence (requires ts_corr or ts_delta with lag)
- **Heavy computation**: Value-Period alignment quality (dual time-series correlation), Cross-metric dispersion (vector operations combined with time-series)

### Recommended Prioritization

**Tier 1 (Immediate Implementation)**:
1. **Fiscal Growth Trajectory** - Directly captures fundamental momentum, high economic intuition, clear directional interpretation for long/short signals
2. **Fundamental Outlier Detection** - Z-score is robust and interpretable; extreme values have clear investment implications (mean reversion or momentum)
3. **Reporting Continuity Essence** - Simple governance proxy; irregular reporting is a clear negative signal with low computational cost

**Tier 2 (Secondary Priority)**:
1. **Fundamental Persistence** - Important for quality factor identification but requires longer lookback periods to stabilize
2. **Recency Weighted Valuation** - Captures acceleration but more complex to interpret than simple growth

**Tier 3 (Requires Further Validation)**:
1. **Reporting Calendar Drift** - May generate noise from legitimate fiscal year changes; requires careful filtering for M&A events
2. **Cross-Metric Dispersion** - Interpretation depends heavily on unknown composition of vector elements

---

## Critical Questions for Further Exploration

### Unanswered Questions:
1. What specific financial metrics (EPS, Revenue, Book Value, etc.) are encoded in the data_item_value vector, and do they have consistent indexing across instruments?
2. Are the values actual reported figures, analyst estimates, or revised/restated data, and how does this affect the temporal validity of historical comparisons?
3. How do international differences in accounting standards (GAAP vs IFRS) affect the comparability of data_item_value across the EUR region?

### Recommended Additional Data:
- Specific item identifiers or metadata mapping vector indices to financial statement line items
- Currency conversion factors and inflation adjustments for cross-border and multi-year comparisons
- Analyst revision counts and standard deviation to distinguish between consensus and disagreement in estimates

### Assumptions to Challenge:
- Assumption that vector elements are cross-sectionally comparable across all instruments; in reality, different industries may report different metrics
- Assumption that fiscal_period_end dates align to standard calendar quarters; many companies have fiscal years ending in non-December months
- Assumption that NaN values represent missing data rather than non-applicable metrics (e.g., financial companies lack COGS)

---

## Methodology Notes

**Analysis Approach**: This report was generated by:
1. Deep field deconstruction to understand the vector nature of financial data and temporal anchoring
2. Question-driven feature generation (8 fundamental questions) applied to both value and temporal dimensions
3. Logical validation of each feature concept against financial accounting principles and equity valuation theory
4. Explicit handling of vector data requirements (vec_avg wrapper necessity)

**Design Principles**:
- Focus on logical meaning over conventional patterns; each feature answers a specific economic question
- Recognition that fiscal_period_end provides essential context without which data_item_value is uninterpretable
- Emphasis on governance signals (reporting regularity) as distinct from performance signals (value growth)
- Transparent documentation of NaN handling philosophy (some features require filling, others treat NaN as signal)

---

*Report generated: 2024-01-15*
*Analysis depth: Comprehensive field deconstruction + 8-question framework*
*Next steps: Implement Tier 1 features, validate vector element composition assumptions, test sensitivity to fiscal year conventions*