The Sultonov Regression Model (SRM) - claiming to be a mathematical model of the market. - page 15
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
One must not lose one's sense of caution in everything so as not to get into a slump. Even now I am not fully convinced of the power of the RIC, so I put it up for discussion to get fresh opinions.
You should be doing political science, not maths.
Signs of megalomania:
1. opening a thread to educate the public on the correct method of predicting prices.
2. The method is stated very vaguely, or not stated at all (like Dr.Drain).
3. the method is demonstrated on simple examples of smooth functions.
4. Claims are made that the method is the best and promises are given that it will lasso forex.
5. The example of application of the method in forex trading is demonstrated on a demo or micro-real.
6. The demo/microreal is drained several times. The author repeats steps 1-5 with the statement that "the model is correct, this market is wrong".
Waiting for the moment when forex will die from the application of (18).
Great. What do we get?
-- either a huge error (interference, fuck, if it fits in the normality interval, the error must be very large)
-- or a contradiction, because the tails are fat.
In both cases, the model cannot be used.
A stop loss, for example, trims tails))
A stop loss, for example, trims the tails))
Signs of megalomania:
1. open a thread to educate the public on the correct method of predicting price.
2. The method is stated very vaguely, or not stated at all (like Dr.Drain).
3. the method is demonstrated on simple examples of smooth functions.
4. The method is claimed to be the best and promised to lasso forex.
5. The example of application of the method in forex trading is demonstrated on a demo or micro-real.
6. The demo/microreal is drained several times. The author repeats steps 1-5 with the statement that "the model is correct, this market is wrong".
Waiting for the moment when forex will die from the application (18).
1. Not forced;
2. Method laid out a long time ago, cited source;
3. Tangent is a smooth function?
4. Claimant, the door is open;
5. Demo, especially microreal is not significantly different from real;
6. Slit 1 time 0.5k because of untimely phased entry of funds. Microreal in action;
1-5. Not asserted anywhere, perhaps there are more correct models. The market cannot be wrong by definition.
We're talking about the model now. I was just citing a contradiction.
So, yes, any TS that overlaps losses without limiting them sucks. That was clear even without econometrics:)
so yeah.
Well it doesn't add up :) purely logically. My point is that it doesn't make sense to build such a model, at least for one instrument.
An overwhelming number of local coryphaei don't divide a cotier into a deterministic and a random component.
But should it be? And two following questions - why and why?
so yeah, any TS that outlasts losses without limiting them sucks. Which was clear even without econometrics :)
1. Still a long way to go for a TS, until at least, I repeat, it is decent to describe the story with some function and get an MO line, then try to continue it for the future.
2. I don't believe in a TS without drawdowns, which should be commensurate with the profit claimed.
Take one out of this pack, for the case of non-linear regression, if you can find it and compare it with RMS. In econometrics, we teach students to fit known functions to raw data and obtain adequate regression equations. In the case of RMS, there is no need to adjust anything, it adapts itself to any input data. Do you feel the difference? It turns out that econometrics is over as a science.
What makes you think that half of a recognized tangent will go into a tangent and not into a syn or something... naive ))))...
about it adjusting itself... there are a lot of adaptive indices... including those based on a similar principle... and there's nothing new here...
1. Still a long way to go for TC, until at least, I repeat, a decent description of the story by some function and get the MoD line, then try to continue it for the future.
2. I don't believe in TC without drawdowns, which should be commensurate with the profit claimed.
Yeah?! And who has been bulldozing our ears for a year and a half that drawdown is a form of investment. Without investment there can be no profit, etc.
Pushkin ? ))