Machine learning in trading: theory, models, practice and algo-trading - page 3512

[Aleksey Vyazmikin]

mytarmailS #:
That is,quantisation is slicing a feature into smaller pieces of data

You claimed " Soquantisation is slicing a feature into smaller pieces of data".

Now you write indignantly "slicing from a smaller original into larger chunks".

Maybe you haven't woken up yet - I don't know....

[mytarmailS]

Aleksey Vyazmikin #:

You stated " Soquantisation is slicing a feature into smaller pieces of data".

Now you write indignantly " slicing from a smaller original into larger chunks".

What was meant was that the plots get smaller. Bad choice of words...

Aleksey Vyazmikin #:

Maybe they haven't woken up yet - I don't know.....

Maybe)

But the picture shows everything correctly, so you could understand what I meant.

So I still haven't heard a clear answer, is it this or that???? Is it quanotation or not?

[Aleksey Vyazmikin]

mytarmailS #:
is this or isn't this?

This.

[mytarmailS]

Aleksey Vyazmikin #:

Tho.

Well then it's the usual well-known, generally accepted"discretisation of a function", why call itquantisation and confuse the poor forumers?

[Aleksey Vyazmikin]

The graph below shows the change in balance at each iteration using independent sample data while building the model using my methodology.

Random selection loses out slightly.....

Same thing, but consider the percentage of positive class content instead of money.

This is where random feels more competitive.

[Maxim Dmitrievsky]

👍🏿

[Aleksey Nikolayev]

Maxim Dmitrievsky #:

👍🏿

The videos are not bad, despite some sarcasm of the professor)

Except that arbitrary thinking is possible only if there is free will, and now it is fashionable to deny it (Libet's experiment, for example).

[Maxim Dmitrievsky]

Aleksey Nikolayev #:

The videos aren't bad, despite some of the professor's acrimony)

Except that arbitrary thinking is possible only if there is free will, and nowadays it is fashionable to deny it (Libet's experiment, for example).

Well, everything here should be measured relative to something, I guess. Of course, it is difficult to think in such extreme categories as complete freedom or complete determinism :) it even seems to lead to disorders.

[СанСаныч Фоменко]

Maxim Dmitrievsky #:

👍🏿

"Arbitrary thinking" is the apotheosis of the ideology of consumption, which is axiomatic for the author! The man talks rubbish that the main thing in man is consumption! Although the history of man is precisely "arbitrary thinking" in the author's terminology. History does not know what the people who remain in history consumed, nor the entire environment in which those people existed. Moreover, that human development is "arbitrary thinking" that does NOT require any special effort.

Pascal video.

[Maxim Dmitrievsky]

СанСаныч Фоменко #:

"Arbitrary thinking" is the apotheosis of the ideology of consumption, which is axiomatic for the author! The man talks rubbish that the main thing in man is consumption! Although the history of man is precisely "arbitrary thinking" in the author's terminology. History does not know what the people who remain in history consumed, nor the entire environment in which those people existed. Moreover, that human development is "arbitrary thinking" that does NOT require any special effort.

Pascal video.

It's hard to oppose Chernigovskaya fans :) When all arguments are caused by hormonal surges, there already everything is mixed up in a pile. So history doesn't know what humans and animals consumed after all?

And when you catch yourself thinking on an empty stomach, are you thinking about Leonardo's works at the same time? :)