MemGuard-Alpha: Detecting and Filtering Memorization-Contaminated Signals in LLM-Based Financial Forecasting via Membership Inference and Cross-Model Disagreement

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate financial alpha signals, yet growing evidence shows that LLMs memorize historical financial data from their training corpora, producing spurious predictive accuracy that collapses out-of-sample. This memorization-induced look-ahead bias threatens the validity of LLM-based quantitative strategies. Prior remedies -- model retraining and input anonymization -- are either prohibitively expensive or introduce significant information loss. No existing method offers practical, zero-cost signal-level filtering for real-time trading. We introduce MemGuard-Alpha, a post-generation framework comprising two algorithms: (i) the MemGuard Composite Score (MCS), which combines five membership inference attack (MIA) methods with temporal proximity features via logistic regression, achieving Cohen's d = 18.57 for contamination separation (d = 0.39-1.37 using MIA features alone); and (ii) Cross-Model Memorization Disagreement (CMMD), which exploits variation in training cutoff dates across LLMs to separate memorized signals from genuine reasoning. Evaluated across seven LLMs (124M-7B parameters), 50 S&P 100 stocks, 42,800 prompts, and five MIA methods over 5.5 years (2019-2024), CMMD achieves a Sharpe ratio of 4.11 versus 2.76 for unfiltered signals (49% improvement). Clean signals produce 14.48 bps average daily return versus 2.13 bps for tainted signals (7x difference). A striking crossover pattern emerges: in-sample accuracy rises with contamination (40.8% to 52.5%) while out-of-sample accuracy falls (47% to 42%), providing direct evidence that memorization inflates apparent accuracy at the cost of generalization.

Does Mechanistic Interpretability Transfer Across Data Modalities? A Cross-Domain Causal Circuit Analysis of Variational Autoencoders

Although mechanism-based interpretability has generated an abundance of insight for discriminative network analysis, generative models are less understood -- particularly outside of image-related applications. We investigate how much of the causal circuitry found within image-related variational autoencoders (VAEs) will generalize to tabular data, as VAEs are increasingly used for imputation, anomaly detection, and synthetic data generation. In addition to extending a four-level causal intervention framework to four tabular and one image benchmark across five different VAE architectures (with 75 individual training runs per architecture and three random seed values for each run), this paper introduces three new techniques: posterior-calibration of Causal Effect Strength (CES), path-specific activation patching, and Feature-Group Disentanglement (FGD). The results from our experiments demonstrate that: (i) Tabular VAEs have circuits with modularity that is approximately 50% lower than their image counterparts. (ii) $β$-VAE experiences nearly complete collapse in CES scores when applied to heterogeneous tabular features (0.043 CES score for tabular data compared to 0.133 CES score for images), which can be directly attributed to reconstruction quality degradation (r = -0.886 correlation coefficient between CES and MSE). (iii) CES successfully captures nine of eleven statistically significant architecture differences using Holm--Šidák corrections. (iv) Interventions with high specificity predict the highest downstream AUC values (r = 0.460, p < .001). This study challenges the common assumption that architectural guidance from image-related studies can be transferred to tabular datasets.