Machine learning in trading: theory, models, practice and algo-trading - page 822
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
In a week I will post BPs already reduced to Erlang's flow of the 1st order. But I don't think I'll do 2 and 3 - I don't need them.
better in the form of code (pseudocode) for the indicator, I pray! then you can do a full training on the different characters and look at
YES! I'm thirsty!
Right now I need to tap these rows with neuron, and then only give them to the coders.
And I don't have the time right now. I'm telling you - our "partners" from Germany are forcing me to do some project, while I've abandoned the Grail. There it is - in the corner...
You don't need it there.
The main thing is not to fill your head with neuronics in your case
In fact, you got a corrupted exponent, and not only, a statistical graph of the vectors of increments.
Go back to vectors, you don't need any threads.
Well, what is the direction - the sum of vectors (of course, you should think about which ones)
That's all
Good luck!
Recommended for study (from fxsaber, he will not advise bad)
To the question of stationarity of influence on the target and the "right" chips
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/232030/page2#comment_7026700
You don't need it there.
The main thing is not to fill your head with neuronics.
In fact, you got a corrupted exponent and not only, a static graph of vectors of increments.
Go back to the vectors, no need for any flows.
No. It's a dunce or a dunce. Only unrestrained sifting through BP can bring cash - I stand by my opinion.
returns with windows e~2 -> 1,2,4,8,16,32, 64.... 10 pieces, some take more meaningful 1,2,5,10,20,30,60,120,300,.... But it is not essential, at the expense of regression and other filters, it is also considered that it does not affect markedly, it's a matter of taste, the main thing that the data were synchronized and did not wander in relation to each other when there are a lot of series (and there always are), otherwise everything breaks, so you have to write them yourself, when there are a lot of sources, for example returns from the past {-1,-2,-4,-8,-16,-32,-64,-128,-256,-512} and target ruturns from the future {+1,+2,+4} as a "stylized" example, more volatility changes there, there are also changes in volatility, delta of cup, OI, etc. BUT the MAIN thing is to use targets with NOT TRANSFERABLE DATA, otherwise it's a fake, which can easily be improvised by any peeping turkey like ZZ
And, for example, leave 2,16,64 on prices, 1,4,32 on volumes, etc.? (By the way, synchronization will be out of sync here, since different bars may appear).
Tried without sifting - the result is about 50%.
I haven't tried it with sifting... If anyone has tried it, are the results better?
returns with an exponential window, for example, and anything else, RSI, makdak, etc. "WITHOUT retraining" of course, on the test, but since ZZ retraining is inherent in the way he looks in the chips, even on random wandering you can easily get 90% on the test.
Either you made a model without retraining, proving this fact in the test, or learned about retraining on a depot drain. Personally, I find out about retraining on the test. The method is simple, but it is carefully avoided by the local coryphaei.
ZZ does not look anywhere by definition: the last link does not exist at all, and the penultimate one changes from time to time. ZZ is a visual representation of the trends with a formal definition of a trend: the number of pips from the last turn.
But ZZ has another problem, at least for me: I was unable to fit it with predictors, i.e. I can fit the model, but I cannot create a REFORMED model. And the reason is not that ZZ is looking somewhere, but that I could not pick up predictors that would have sufficient predictive power, i.e. my predictors for ZZ are noise, on which and manages to fit the model with very good indicators (error less than 10% easily), but if you run this model outside the training-testing file, you get random error, which is an indicator of retraining.
ZZ looks nowhere by definition: the last link does not exist at all, and the penultimate one changes from time to time. ZZ is a visual representation of trends with a formal definition of the trend: the number of pips from the last reversal.
ZZ does not look forward when working on a real account or in the tester on the 0-m bar, but if you look at it on the history for example on 10 000m bar, then it certainly does. The matrix for learning is taken from the history.
On the other hand, Alexey says that it cannot be used as a target because it is looking into the past as well. So what? We only feed the data from the past to the input of the NS.That it looks into the future is a good thing for the target as we want to predict the future.
Exactly! You can't look into the past for targeting, just like chips into the future, if you gentlemen don't understand WHY, do an experiment with SB,
To fit to the past, it's enough to skip any input to the output without any transformations.
To understand WHY - it is necessary to have a logical explanation, from your words it is not visible. Could you explain, without referring to the experiments?
To adjust to the past - it is enough to let any input to the output without any transformations.
I don't understand what you've written at all - it's nonsense.
Exactly! You can't look to the past for targeting, just like chips to the future, if you gentlemen don't understand WHY, conduct an experiment with SB, I wrote above and have written before me, I repeat:
conduct an experiment with SB
conduct an experiment with the SB
do the experiment with the SB
Don't give the assignments to others, get the results here.