Home · Work · System design
Treasury and marketsEvent-driven evidence investigationlayered

Margin-call dispute investigation

Counterparties can disagree because of trade populations, market data, valuation models, collateral terms or cut-off times.

Approach

The investigator decomposes the call into explainable drivers, aligns both populations and produces a ranked break set with source-specific reconciliation steps.

Organisations, systems and operating conditions are intentionally anonymised and recomposed. The design demonstrates engineering and banking-domain reasoning; it does not represent a named client estate, vendor product or measured production result.

Overview

System overview

Five operating planes separate interaction, identity, decision control, authoritative state and operating evidence.

Margin-call dispute investigation: logical system architecture A five-plane architecture showing channels, access controls, twelve platform services, authoritative domain systems, evidence and operations. Solid nodes are active for this illustrative case; dashed nodes are optional platform capabilities. aSystem boundary and decision authoritySchematic architecture · illustrative scenario Experience planeAccess and scope planeDecision control planeAuthoritative data and effectsEvidence and operations rail Customer Channelweb · mobile · voiceStaff Decision Workspacereview · explain · approveOperations Control Roomincident · replay · withdrawRequest Ingress GatewayTLS · rate limit · schemaIdentity & Purpose GateOIDC · subject · consentPayload MinimiserPII policy · field maskCapability Directoryversion · scope · healthEvidence ContextCompilerContext & evidenceParty RelationshipResolverIdentity & relationshipsAuthority Rules EngineAuthority & policyJourney StateCoordinatorWorkflow & custodyTyped Action BrokerIntegration & effectsDecision ReceiptLedgerEvidence & auditReasoning RouteManagerModel executionEffective-DatedKnowledge HubKnowledge & rulesBehaviour EvaluationHarnessEvaluation & releaseOutcome RecoverySupervisorResilience & recoveryOperational Read ModelWorld state & read modelsDecision ReviewWorkbenchHuman decision & operationsTrade captureauthoritative recordpositionsauthoritative recordmarket dataauthoritative recordcollateralauthoritative recordriskauthoritative record HTTPSHTTPSoperations context Immutable Evidence ArchiveTrace · Metric · Cost PipelineIncident · Replay · Custody Queue telemetryexceptions executed or authoritative pathproposal or optional capabilityevidence and telemetryactive in this case
Figure 1. The system boundary separates interaction, authority, business state and operating evidence. Solid services participate in this case; dashed services remain outside the admitted route. This is an illustrative system model, not a named deployment.

Permitted workThe design may reconcile positions and simulate options. Booking, limit consumption, valuation approval and market action remain controlled systems and roles.

Consistency ruleUse event time, valuation time, legal-entity scope and source cut-offs; label forecast, pending and settled state separately.

Hard boundaryThe model is not a system of record, identity provider, policy authority or proof that an external effect occurred.

Deployment

Deployment

An alert or case requires evidence fan-out, deterministic triage, residual model reasoning and a defensible human disposition.

Margin-call dispute investigation: deployment and trust-zone topology A production topology separates public edge, identity boundary, workload cluster, integration plane, data enclave and operating controls. Connections name transport and identity protocols, and a second region provides controlled failover. bDeployment topology and failure domainsLogical deployment · no measured estate data EDGE AND ACCESS PRIVATE WORKLOAD CLUSTER INTEGRATION AND DATA ENCLAVE OPERATIONS, EVIDENCE AND RECOVERY PLANE Web applicationfirewallTLS · bot · rate API ingressschema · quota Identity brokerOIDC · MFA Purpose gateclaims · consent HTTPStokensubject Regional traffic managerhealth · canary · failover Workload identity issuershort-lived service tokens Event & work queuepartition · DLQ · backpressure Secrets & key serviceenvelope encryption · rotation Evidence ContextCompilerzonal workloadAuthority RulesEnginezonal workloadDecision ReceiptLedgerzonal workloadOperational ReadModelzonal workloadDecision ReviewWorkbenchzonal workloadReserved workloadslotdisabledReserved workloadslotdisabledReserved workloadslotdisabled HTTPS · scoped JWT workload token async eventkey lookup IntegrationgatewaymTLSTrade capturesystem of recordpositionssystem of recordmarket datasystem of recordcollateralsystem of record Model route enclavepolicy · schema · egress Qualified data storesSQL · graph · object Trace, metric & cost pipelineOpenTelemetry · redaction Decision receipt archiveappend-only · retention Reconciliation workersreadback · replay · DLQ On-call & review queuescustody · SLA · escalation Secondary-region standbycompatible manifest telemetryreceiptsexceptions
Figure 2. Workloads remain isolated from systems of record. Short-lived identity, typed integration contracts, append-only evidence and controlled failover define the deployable boundary; the topology is schematic.
Authority checkpoint

The system may quantify breaks but cannot agree a legal position or release collateral.

Runtime

Runtime flow

A deterministic outer workflow contains model-led work inside typed, observable calls. Dashed messages remain proposals until policy or a human grants authority.

Margin-call dispute investigation: event processing and recovery flow A five-lane event architecture shows authoritative producers, admission and ordering, evidence qualification, decision and effect handling, and the recovery rail. Late, duplicate and failed events follow separate paths to reconciliation and replay. cRuntime protocol and control pointsProtocol model · illustrative execution Authoritative producersAdmission and orderingEvidence and decisionEffect and reviewEvidence, reconciliation and replay Trade captureevent time · source versionpositionsevent time · source versionmarket dataevent time · source versioncollateralevent time · source version Schema gateversion · identity · duplicatePartitioned event logentity key · watermark Enrichment workersbounded fan-out · freshnessDecision workerrule gate · bounded score Effect or review routetyped action · custodyOutcome verifierreadback · reconcile source eventsource eventqualified readqualified read admittedorderedcontextdecision Late-event correctionreopen · append · notifyDead-letter queuefault class · ownerIdempotent replaysame key · checkpointDecision receipt ledgerversions · basis · custodyOutcome monitorlag · drift · harm invalid / faileddelayed outcomecheckpoint replaydecision evidenceeffect receipt Consistency: Pin policy and evidence versions at case open. Later corrections append and may trigger reassessment; they do not rewrite the historic basis silently.
Figure 3. Event time, admission, evidence qualification, decision and delayed outcome remain separate. Late or failed events enter correction and replay paths with preserved lineage. The paths are protocol semantics, not an observed production trace.
S

State model

Append-only case events feed a current-state projection. Evidence rows keep source, observation time, validity, correction history and narrative usage.

I

Integration choice

Use asynchronous ingestion and bounded parallel reads. Slow providers have independent timeout and circuit-breaker policy so one source cannot exhaust the case tier.

C

Consistency semantics

Pin policy and evidence versions at case open. Later corrections append and may trigger reassessment; they do not rewrite the historic basis silently.

Services

Services and interfaces

These roles are deliberately vendor-neutral. Each can be independently owned, versioned and replaced.

  1. CAS
    Context and evidence

    Evidence Context Compiler

    Accepts a typed evidence request and returns the minimum permitted facts with source, event time, observation time, validity and exclusions.

    Degraded routeExclude stale or unauthorised fields, ask a bounded question, or stop the route. Never fill a gap with an inferred fact.
  2. DES
    Evidence and audit

    Decision Receipt Ledger

    Appends request, versions, policy result, model proposal, approval, action receipt, readback, correction and custody events under one correlation key.

    Degraded routeBlock a consequential close when mandatory evidence is missing; keep the case open with an explicit evidence defect.
  3. OSR
    World state and read models

    Operational Read Model

    Builds time-qualified projections from source events and reconciliations without becoming the legal system of record.

    Degraded routeExpose source lag and fall back to direct reads for defined critical facts; never present missing feeds as zero.
  4. HRC
    Human decision and operations

    Decision Review Workbench

    Presents claims beside evidence, alternatives, uncertainty, missing information, permitted actions and current custody.

    Degraded routeRoute to a trained queue with the original sources and open work. The model summary is never the sole evidence available.
  5. PDS
    Authority and policy

    Authority Rules Engine

    Evaluates identity, purpose, capability, amount, risk tier and policy version; returns allow, deny, step-up or human-review with reasons.

    Degraded routeFail closed for effects and restricted data. Read-only explanation may continue only from approved public or customer-visible sources.
Figure 4. Each service exposes a typed contract and a defined degraded route. Coordination stays in the control plane while domain ownership remains outside it.
Data

Data and records

Durable records carry provenance, authority, effect and custody without turning a transcript into an uncontrolled memory store.

Margin-call dispute investigation: state ownership and evidence lineage Authoritative source observations feed six versioned runtime records. Each record names a single write owner. An append-only event and evidence stream builds a disposable current-state projection and supports audit replay. dState lineage, ownership and temporal validityLogical records · fields are illustrative AUTHORITATIVE INPUTS · POINT-IN-TIME QUALIFIEDTrade capturesource version · observed atpositionssource version · observed atmarket datasource version · observed atcollateralsource version · observed atqualified inputqualified inputqualified inputqualified input WRITE OWNER · Evidence Context CompilerRequest enveloperequest_idpurposeactor_refsubject_refversioned · attributable · retainedWRITE OWNER · Authority Rules EngineContext manifestcontext_idsource_refsource_versionobserved_atversioned · attributable · retainedWRITE OWNER · Typed Action BrokerCase statecase_idstatestate_versioncurrent_custodianversioned · attributable · retainedWRITE OWNER · Reasoning Route ManagerAuthority decisiondecision_idpolicy_versionrequested_capabilityoutcomeversioned · attributable · retainedWRITE OWNER · Behaviour Evaluation HarnessAction and effect receiptaction_ididempotency_keyinput_hashdispatch_statusversioned · attributable · retainedWRITE OWNER · Operational Read ModelCustody eventtransfer_idfrom_ownerto_ownerreasonversioned · attributable · retained APPEND-ONLY CASE EVENTS + DECISION RECEIPTSrequest hash · source versions · policy version · proposal · authority · effect readback · custody Operational current-state viewrebuildable projection
Figure 5. The record chain preserves source version, write ownership, authority and custody. Solid records are required in this scenario; dashed records remain compatible but dormant.
Consistency contractDomain source rule

Use event time, valuation time, legal-entity scope and source cut-offs; label forecast, pending and settled state separately.

Choices

Trade-offs

The selected design is not universally superior. It is the safer fit for this boundary and failure cost.

  1. 01

    Prefetch context or acquire it when needed

    Selected path

    Prefetch stable, purpose-safe facts; acquire volatile facts on demand against a time-qualified snapshot.

    Rejected path

    Load a broad customer profile at session start.

    Cost acceptedThe selected design adds source calls and latency, but reduces stale data, excess exposure and accidental reuse.

  2. 02

    Mutable current-state record or append-only decision history

    Selected path

    Use append-only events plus a rebuildable current-state projection.

    Rejected path

    Overwrite the case row with its latest status.

    Cost acceptedReplay and storage are more complex, but point-in-time reconstruction and correction lineage remain possible.

  3. 03

    Query every source in the critical path or maintain operational read models

    Selected path

    Use event-fed projections for scale and direct readback for consequential effects.

    Rejected path

    Fan out to all systems of record for every interaction.

    Cost acceptedRead models introduce lag and reconciliation work, but reduce source load and make cross-system views feasible.

  4. 04

    Review every case or apply risk-tiered human checkpoints

    Selected path

    Keep people at irreversible, ambiguous and policy-exception points; sample lower-risk automated outcomes independently.

    Rejected path

    Require the same manual approval at every step.

    Cost acceptedRisk-tiering reduces review load but needs calibrated thresholds, sampling and immediate withdrawal of authority when drift appears.

  5. 05

    Reason over policy text at runtime or compile executable rules

    Selected path

    Compile stable decision logic and retain retrieval for explanation and residual ambiguity.

    Rejected path

    Ask a model to interpret the source document for every request.

    Cost acceptedRule compilation needs controlled change, but creates repeatable decisions, regression tests and clear exceptions.

Figure 6. Teal marks the selected route; coral dotted rules preserve the rejected alternative. Each decision states the cost accepted rather than presenting one architecture as universally superior.
Recovery

Failures and recovery

Retries are bounded by knowledge of business effect; unknown outcome remains visible, owned and independently reconciled.

Margin-call dispute investigation: failure classification and recovery control flow Five failure sources converge on a classifier that distinguishes known no effect, known failure, unknown outcome, material evidence gaps and control-plane failure. Each state has an explicit recovery route, service degradation and evidence receipt. eFailure classification and recovery policyControl model · thresholds set by owners DETECTION POINTSEFFECT CLASSIFIERRECOVERY DECISIONSERVICE-SPECIFIC DEGRADATION Source dependencyA population mismatch can be misdiagnosed…Authority servicePolicy is unavailable, expired, or returns…Reasoning routeOutput fails schema, citation, grounding…Action pathTransport times out after dispatch & the…Evidence railReceipt or custody append fails after a… Outcome classifierattempt · idempotency · source readback ·… Known no effectSafe bounded retry with the same…Known failureNarrow, queue, compensate, or fail closed…Unknown outcomeRead back authoritative state before retry…Material evidence gapRetain custody & create an owned…Control-plane failureStop promotion or dispatch; restore the…Evidence Context CompilerExclude stale or unauthorisedfields, ask a bounded question, orstop the route. Never fill a gap…Decision Receipt LedgerBlock a consequential close whenmandatory evidence is missing;keep the case open with an…Operational Read ModelExpose source lag & fall back todirect reads for defined criticalfacts; never present missing feeds…Decision Review WorkbenchRoute to a trained queue with theoriginal sources & open work. Themodel summary is never the sole…Authority Rules EngineFail closed for effects &restricted data. Read-onlyexplanation may continue only from… RECOVERY RECEIPTfault origin · classification basis · owner · retry/compensation key · readback reference · residual risk · resolved at classifier evidencerecovery evidence Pattern rule: Missing materialevidence blocks a clean close. Thecase enters a completeness queue…
Figure 7. Recovery follows the known business-effect state, not the transport symptom. Every branch ends in a receipt preserving fault origin, custody and reconciliation basis.
Capacity

Performance and capacity

Actual thresholds belong to accountable service owners. The design exposes the equations and observables that those owners must baseline.

Dependent variablesOperating
envelope
  • recall and false-close rate
  • case-pack latency
  • source completeness
  • investigator queue age
Capacity relationships
  1. 01peak_enrichment_qps = peak_case_rate x sources_per_case
  2. 02review_hours = residual_cases / investigator_throughput
  3. 03evidence_storage = cases x evidence_rows x retention_window
Privacy lens

Restrict sensitive position and counterparty data to entitled desks and exclude it from reusable prompts or broad telemetry.

Figure 8. The variables define what must be measured before capacity or quality claims can be accepted. Relationships are analytical scaffolds, not invented targets or production results.
Operations

Release and operations

A design is production-ready only when teams can prove what happened, recover it and change it safely.

Minimum release gates
  1. 01

    late market or position event test

  2. 02

    limit breach under stale data test

  3. 03

    valuation-source reconciliation

  4. 04

    dual-authorisation and booking readback

Figure 9. Promotion requires evidence at each gate and a compatible rollback route. No gate is implied to have passed; accountable owners set thresholds and sign the record.
Operating stateReleaseRecover
Evidence

Trade snapshots, market-data versions, agreement clauses, valuation lineage, break classification and negotiation record.

Human authority

Collateral and legal specialists settle the dispute and approve any transfer.

Evolution

Use shadow decisions and blind samples before allowing deterministic closes. Keep agent-touched cases under human disposition until operating evidence supports narrower review.

Ownership

Treasury or desk, market risk, operations, finance and technology owners accept the design.

Figure 10. Evidence, human authority, ownership and controlled evolution remain coupled throughout operation. Removing any quadrant breaks the assurance case.