Machine learning in trading: theory, models, practice and algo-trading - page 2747
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
It was slipped in above that the value of even a correct prediction can be zero.
To me, the value of a prediction depends not only on the probability of error, but on the teacher himself.
Is the teacher predicting the next bar or the trend?
What time period is the prediction being made and what time period are we trading on?
What target profit is our teacher predicting?
What is the relationship between the teacher and the spread?
There are a lot of questions that have not been discussed here.
It's principled, principled rewiring. We don't need models that live for 100 years. We need a model that will give a prediction for the next bar with low error. Then comes the advisor, and there are their own problems with this prediction.
I don't get it at all. What is the logic of the counsellor then?
The logic of the advisor is determined by the teacher.
But re-learning on each new bar is fundamental. We are moving away from the concept of model "life" time, as there is no "life" on non-stationary markets. Because of non-stationarity, all these tests "out-of-sample" are meaningless.
So what's the error on the new data?
Once again: no more than 20%. There was more detail above.
Once again: no more than 20 per cent. It was more detailed above.
It's principled, principled rewiring. We don't need models that live for 100 years. We need a model that will give a prediction for the next bar with low error. Then comes the Expert Advisor, and it has its own problems with this prediction.
The logic of the counsellor is determined by the teacher.
But repeated training on each new bar is fundamental. We are getting away from the concept of model "life" time, as there is no "life" in non-stationary markets. Because of non-stationarity, all these tests "out-of-sample" are meaningless.
I don't argue with training on every bar, and maybe even on a non-stationary tick for example. I don't understand the structure of training then completely. Is EA logic a separate training or part of the training on each bar? It is like the tails of the first training, how many tails, or stages of training?
On topic)
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing trading strategies
Not the Grail, just ordinary such - Bablokos!!!!
Aleksey Nikolayev, 2022.09.16 16:28
Well, mathematicians are very strong in inventing new signs and new values for old ones. The main problem in reading mathematical texts is to assimilate the system of notations, which is different for each author. And the texts of theoretical physicists are impossible to read at all - they are complete outlaws in the sense of originality of used notations. Therefore, if there is any "true" meaning of some mathematical notation, it is not known to anyone).
Please note that from build 3440 we start distributing AVX versions of the software: https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/432624/page5#comment_42117241.
The next step is to rewrite the mathematical apparatus to vector and OpenCL functions, which gives ten-tract accelerations without the need to install additional libraries like CUDA.