From theory to practice - page 146

New comment
 
ILNUR777:
If it's working, but not quite, that tells a different story. And without that other, even if you use different sample sizes, it's no use. It's not clear what was revealed in the end. The history here is all Leo Tolstoy.
I agree. I am waiting for the start of real-time trading. I have already tweaked the programme.
 
Alexander_K2:
Agreed. I'm waiting for real-time trading to start. Already tweaked the program.
What will it all look like for the audience?
Backdated deals?
 
ILNUR777:
How will it all look to the audience?
Backdated deals?
Alas, yes. I work during the day, I watch the results in the evening. Don't worry, Ilnur - everything will be fair. I'm not going to sell any signals here, I'm interested in the principle of solving the problem. I stand by my opinion - this problem is solvable. In quantum physics, it's not the kind of thing already have been solved.
 
Alexander_K2: overthe past week, I have only encountered 2-3 negative trades and about 30 positive ones. How's that feel? А?
You only hear yourself, but for the second time: last week was flat, in such a market any comeback system will work, even the most primitive one. The trends will show what's what.)
 
Alexander_K2:
Alas, yes. I work during the day and look at the results in the evening. Don't worry, Ilnur - everything will be fair. I'm not going to sell any signals here, I'm interested in the principle of solving the problem. I stand by my opinion - this problem is solvable. In quantum physics, it's not the kind of thing already solved.
In quantum physics there are more theories than concrete solutions. And if everyone were like you, there would probably be no solutions at all)))).
So far, no deals, no promised description for the reader to repeat. The word "quantum physics" is like that, it seems to be there, but it seems to be no big deal.
 
bas:
You can only hear yourself, but for the second time: last week was a flat week, in such a market any return system will work, even the most primitive one. The trends will show what's what.)
The most primitive one would not give those points that are available. BB will not give that. It is not clear how exactly this confidence interval was constructed, or if it is even a contrived one. No alnorhythm was given. The physicist is shredded in word these days. And most likely does not even have the property that he drew in the picture.
 
ILNUR777:
. There was no alnorhythm given.
It was, download the file and read the description just above. All the formulas are in the cells. What else do you need? The algorithm from the example Excel file and description is completely understandable. I have already copied formulas to my self-written terminal and the calculations and "picture" certainly coincided. I have faced the lack of iron resources for calculations on large tick volumes.
 
Wizard2018:
Was, download the file and read the descriptions just above. The formulas are in the cells. What else is needed? The algorithm from the example Excel file and the description is completely clear. I have already transferred formulas to my self-written terminal and the calculations have certainly coincided. I faced the lack of hardware resources for calculations of large tick volumes.
We are moving in parallel to the common goal!
 
Alexander_K2:  Geez, I'm tired of repeating that there are NO MACHINES!!! We open a trade when the average value of increments (lower chart) crosses the 99.5% confidence level, and close when this average value of increments becomes = 0.

Compare the bottom graph of the average incremental value with the top graph of the price itself.

By the way, here is your "MA", which supposedly does not exist, but which you implicitly use without being aware of it) Shown with the yellow line. Subtract the yellow line ("trend") from the price, and you get your grey line (the cyclical component). Quite a poor "MA", and it's clear to everyone why - it ends up being just the price value N points backwards))) That is why, for example, it gives a huge jump down around 00:00 on the 18th of January, which is not in the original price.

If you want you can compare it with the pictureat https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/221552/page140#comment_6367756.


 
bas:

By the way, here is your "MA", which supposedly does not exist, but which you implicitly use without being aware of it) Shown by the yellow line. Subtract the yellow line ("trend") from the price, and you get your grey line (cyclical component). Quite a poor "MA", and it's clear to everyone why - it ends up being just the price value N points backwards))) That is why, for example, it gives a huge jump down around 00:00 on the 18th of January, which is not in the original price.

Those who wish may compare it with the pictureat https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/221552/page140#comment_6367756.



it looks like :)

1...139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153...1981
New comment
Reason: