From theory to practice - page 705
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
I don't know.
I can hardly find in the public domain the correct financial formulas or some calculations of this science.
At least I have not seen any.
Are you suggesting that each area of application has its own definition of expectation (variance, etc.) in the theorist? In biology one, in physics another, and in economics another?
Are you suggesting that each area of application has its own definition of expectation (variance, etc.) in the theorist? In biology one, in physics another, and in economics another?
No
We work in the financial market and we do financial formulas.
dispersion and expected payoffs are just for evaluation of trading results, afterword.
By the way, I remember that you were interested in game theory with a view to its possible practical application in our field.
What are the results of this push beyond your usual boundaries?
As I wrote above, it all boils down to a theorist, in this case a Nash equilibrium and some random fluctuations around it. The problem is that a purely speculative market and a market with a major player (like a central bank) are very different games. The mechanism of transition from the former to the latter and vice versa is unclear.
no
we work in the financial market and make formulas financial
variance and expected payoffs are just for assessing the trading result, afterword as it were
Afterword, on the basis of which a preface is written for the next trading period.
Market making is pure econometrics, which includes a terver "because" and why not, but if not, one wouldn't really want to
in other words, no one cares about the specific distributions of the processes, because in economics, relationships and multiparametric models rule.
Why did they invent econometrics? So you could sit and teach the terver, yeah :)
Why not assume that it simply uses theoristic methods which are independent of the particular form of the distribution? Chebyshev and Markov inequalities, non-parametric statistics, stationary processes in a broad sense, etc. etc.
That is, not only to chew it up, but also to put it in your mouth.) Do you make any effort yourself to understand the question you are interested in? Well, at least try.)
Market making is pure econometrics, which includes a terver "because" and why not, but if not, one wouldn't really want to
in other words, nobody cares about the specific distributions of the processes, because in economics, relationships and multiparametric models rule.
Why did they invent econometrics? So you could sit and teach the terver, yeah :)
If anyone is schizophrenic about the market maker working "against all odds" then that's their next problem :))))
By the way, does anyone have a subscription to Econometrics journal or archives?
The article is good, but it is not a theorist.
Working against everyone is a strategy worthy of attention, quite a serious and immense topic to explore.
That's what it comes down to, not rational thinking, but irrational thinking.
Because there is no answer to that question and these islands with variable probability are stochastic in nature, the law of conservation of energy, and SBs, yes, also come in different forms, perfect and not so much. So it's more a matter of faith, who wants to believe and who doesn't. The personal characteristics of particular SBs diverge from antipersistent to persistent, which gives in the long run a slight deviation, like everything in this world, nothing is perfect, however the deviations are all in the limit of the norm, and we need over that, and who has more "happiness" Gates, Soros or Mani, then on average, the same, here is a paradox for you.
Sorry about the "dearie", that's just a polite way to address a lady. And thank you for the "experience+knowledge", I don't know how you know I have it, it's probably a woman's intuition.
Well, on the other hand, on what basis do you have a strong desire to compare BP with SB? Or, what are the signs that indicate the "similarity" of BP with SB? The distribution of what exactly are you measuring in the BP, not the candles?
I think I care, I thought so too at first when Doc investigated the timing of tics coming in, look, the distribution of tics, there is no chaos there, there is order and structure, and chaos can be made by exponential reading, I took this data from Alexander, I counted and compared it myself.