Machine learning in trading: theory, models, practice and algo-trading - page 217
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 hear you, I disagree, but it's my opinion and not necessarily the right one
Are there statistics on these "true" levels?
Actually, there are some statistics.
The picture shows the dynamics of price movement probability distributions from time. The calculation is based on real quotes. To simplify the construction the beginning of quotes is reduced to zero.
X - time, Y - price, Z - probability density function. Peaks are maxima of probability distribution. Apparently they are understood as levels.
The quotes go basically from peak to peak.
Actually, there are some statistics.
X is time, Y is price, Z is probability density. Peaks are the maxima of the distribution. Apparently that's what they understand as levels.
Who are they? :)
What are the levels as you see them? ))who are they? :)
What are levels as you see them? ))Lydi, the cat works from levels.
You know the levels.) I just showed an objective picture.
Lydi, the cat works on levels.
You know better than me about levels).
You give statistics about levels, but I know what you mean by levels, right? :) already funny.
You give statistics of some levels, but I know better what you mean by levels, right? :) That's ridiculous.
All right, let it not be levels, I don't care. It says in the picture - the maximums of the probability distribution.)
You can't calculate them yourself, as you wrote.)
no statistics because I can't write it down so far, as I wrote earlier, I can show you real trades from my diary, if you really want to proufe so much
All right, let it not be levels, I do not care. The picture says - mxims of the probability distribution.)
You yourself can not calculate them, as you wrote.)
What do you mean by levels if you are not able to calculate them?what's the point of telling me that?
What's the point of asking me questions if you know everything?)
Are you scattered?
What's the point of asking me questions if you know everything?)
You ran away?
No, we're not scattered... I just understand that we think differently, even if I start straining and proving yours, you'll prove yours and the result will be stupid, shitty, banal argument, like the one that was about stat. In fact nobody needs this argument, its essence or result, in the end everyone will make the same, so I'll just refrain knowing how it will end...
No, we're not... I just understand that we think differently, even if I start to strain and prove mine, you will prove yours and the result will be a stupid, shitty, banal argument, like the one that was about the stat. Allocation which dragged on for 7 pages of a forum, and in fact nobody needs this dispute, its essence, the result, in the end everyone will remain at their own, so I'll just refrain, knowing ahead of what it will end ...
I've written before.
You understand perfectly well that it is impossible to prove presence or absence of "higher forces" by something controlling in principle. In them it is possible only to believe - as you, or not to believe.
By the way, I wasn't even planning to change your mind).
And that's what we agreed on, isn't it? And in fact, I was answeringDimitri).
Yes, and not 7 pages, just one).