Errors, bugs, questions - page 2686
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
OK, that's a good answer, that's about right, it's a pity the source was never found,
it remains to find out at what total number of passes the GA will be switched on, so far it seems 100 000 000 passes, for my tasks it is enough
Provided that the optimized parameter is one. if more, it will still turn on genetics. forcibly.
Provided that there is only one parameter to be optimised. If there is more, genetics will still be activated.
hmm, the participants of the battle have risen ))))
this is my question! - where is this information buried?!
You have to agree that when reading and selecting Slow optimization setting (slow complete search) you expect a complete search and not guessing the puzzle where the information about this mode is!
or the help section should contain this information:
Slow (full brute force)
This mode searches through all possible combinations of values of input variables selected for optimization in the corresponding tab.
This method is the most accurate, but it takes quite a long time to run the Expert Advisor with all combinations of parameters.
hmm, the contestants have pulled up ))))
therein lies my question! - where is this information buried?!
Agree that when reading and selecting Slow optimization (full search), you expect a full search, not guessing where the information about this mode lies!
Either that or the help section should contain this information:
or, so there is no ambiguity, this menu item should be called .... Well, not as it looks now.I agree.
I mentioned this earlier, but it was not heard.
hmm, the contestants have pulled up ))))
therein lies my question! - where is this information buried?!
Agree that when reading and selecting Slow optimization (full search), you expect a full search, not guessing where the information about this mode lies!
here, in general, or the help section should contain this information:
or, so there is no ambiguity, this menu item should be called .... Well, not as it looks now.100 mio passes for 1 second each is 3.2 years of computation on one core ~ a month of uninterrupted computation on a 32 core machine.
Why?
100 mio passes of 1 second each is 3.2 years of computation on one core ~ a month of uninterrupted computation on a 32 core machine.
What for?
That's my point exactly.
I don't understand what all this overkill is for. Make normal algorithms that don't require trying.
All the "right" combinations you've found are correct only for the time period when the trying takes place.
And then what?
Then comes the next release with an excuse - we haven't "optimized" it enough and need a more powerful supercomputer.
Let's search through bytes in the ex5 file of the EA - maybe these bytes will make up a graceful EA by themselves. :))
100 mio passes of 1 second each is 3.2 years of computation on one core ~ a month of uninterrupted computation on a 32 core machine.
Why?
the question was how it works, not why, but thanks to the help of the room, the situation has cleared up ;)
So what next?
And then the next flop with an excuse - it is not "optimized" enough, we need a more powerful supercomputer.
Let's hope for the best, and there are different optimisation tasks, don't you agree that not every optimisation may pass a forward test to the right of OOS and even to the left? ;)
SZZ: I know that miracles don't happen, but I'd like to believe it ;)))
the question was how it works, not why, but thanks to the help of the room, the situation has been clarified ;)
So it works, in general, logically. Instead of starting a useless and endless search, genetics is enabled. You could simply deactivate the Start button, but who would that help?
So it works, in general, logically. Instead of starting a useless and endless search, genetics is activated. You could simply deactivate the Start button, but who would that help?
There must not be any amateurishness in the software, that is what I mean, everything must be documented, if it says "Complete Brute Force" then it must be complete and the conditions for switching to any other optimization must be written in the docs.
Otherwise, the user expects one thing and is surprised to find another, and you can not send this user to study the docks, as they do not exist in this matter.
A complete enumeration may be needed not only for optimization, but also, for example, to identify dependencies between parameters and their impact on the result, to build dependency maps, within the framework of optimization this task cannot be solved, because there will be "holes" in the maps.
There should not be any amateurism in the software, that is what we are talking about, everything must be documented, if it says "Full overshoot", then it must be full, and the conditions for switching to any other optimization must be specified in the docs.
Otherwise a user expects one thing and is surprised to find another, and you can not send this user to study the docs, as there are none on this subject.
In the docks, of course. Or for the first time (for each EA) to display an alert.
But, in general, it is already normal practice that the software thinks for a dumb user. Because the user really becomes more dumb demanding for intuitive interface.
Full brute force may be needed not only for optimization, but, for example, to identify dependencies between parameters and their impact on the result, building maps of dependencies, within the framework of optimization this problem can not be solved, because there will be "holes" in the maps.
Mat computing mode?
In the docks, of course.
Math mode?
Here.
And so is math mode.