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
And me and Mathemat and someone else saw this noise on ticks. Moreover, on the ticks it is clear that +-1 points have higher probability of the reverse movement than its continuation. Unfortunately, this regularity is inside the spread. And it is not high.
And the fact that it appeared after the processing is interesting.
to Piligrimm
I tried it with all available in MathCad and MathLab and I wasn't satisfied with the result.
PS: your avatar isn't the universal "OM" sound by any chance?
to grasn and rsi and all
I want to explain, because you have repeatedly attacked me for the slogan "Number rules the world". I brought it so that you could pay attention to it. You're smiling, but I don't think you fully understand what I'm talking about. I suggest that you make a very simple experiment. Suppose the price changes as a sine wave. Draw a sine on a piece of paper and put two reference points on it. Like this one.
Fig.1
That is, we have taken the Close minutiae and assume that it is a correct digitisation, see fig. 1. (blue marks). Everything looks nice and correct, and now think, if the first tick has not come exactly at the end of the minute, but for example 2 seconds before the end of the minute, + the second tick was not at the end of the minute, but at the beginning. See Fig. 2 for the result (the blue counts stand differently on the time axis). And it turns out that the sine waveform has changed, the frequency is wrong, the phase is wrong, and in general, everything is bad .....
Fig.2
Who can tell me which sine waveform is real? Or can you also give me a prediction, what will be the number at the next Close (even if it's strictly a sine wave)?
How many copies are already broken in the analysis of the Y axis (prices), and the X axis (time) is forgotten. Or they think it is OK. They take Close and go ahead. And as a result .... long and persistent searches and conclusions DSP does not work.
And let's write this acronym differently, so DSP. (DSP !!!) the only thing left to do is to define what the signal is. Do we not know how to process numbers like adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing, what else do we have? Well, who here does not know DC, these complex operations.
You may still wonder why many DSP methods do not produce the results you expect from them. Maybe proper X-axis processing will improve many digital processing methods, starting with the simplest MA? And for the signal (the useful component that moves the market) too, not much is known, what I read is the same philosophy :-(.
And unfortunately money rules the world, not numbers.
Although I still undertake to prove to anyone (you can buy me a brandy, because I already owe many people :-)) that if between that "true" price, which no one knows, there is someone who can control the sampling rate, then he can do anything he wants. From an ordinary 100 MHz sine wave, you can make any curve you see on the screen. At least remember the movies, where the wheels go backwards and the cart goes forwards :-).
And that's why that beautiful phrase, "a number rules the world and the name of this number is sampling rate". It's not so bad. After all, by controlling this number, you can control the curve on the screen, i.e. the value (price) of money. And if money rules the world, then by controlling it, I will rule the world.
Z.U., what's that cartoon, "beaver-breath" I really want to see :-). And you can not get rid of me so easily, like Prival in the mire, do not wait :-).
And in the light of what I have written above, for me any DC will never be that almighty GOD who can slip me any figure at any time. They will be weak :-) It's hard to take a break from the fighting course :-)
Prival, Mathemat, I'm afraid to get annoyed again, but I have to say it again - there is virtually no noise in the quotes - that is the input signal. You are trying to use the tools of mathematical statistics (filtering is the same). Statistics of what? Statistics, laws of distribution, their moments of different orders refer to random variables (processes). If you get a tick, is that a signal or noise? I argue that it is a signal, because with this data you can give a buy or sell order, and it will be executed (all other general conditions being equal). Yes, it is difficult to predict what the next price value will be, so I like to think there is a random component there and a non-random component that can be identified and then extrapolated-predict. And it is not random, it is just unknown. Or, if you like, all random - without dividing it into additive components. What are you going to separate? The same Kalman filter will filter out a very definite component - defined by your own model in the form of a smooth analytic function. Do you know it? I don't. You're trying to identify the dynamic properties of the market, and applying a physical analogy is, I'm afraid, also futile: you can find minute candles with an amplitude greater than a figure, as well as gaps, which indicates that it is practically inertial-free.
And me and Mathemat and someone else saw this noise on ticks. Moreover, on the ticks it is clear that +-1 points have higher probability of the reverse movement than its continuation. Unfortunately, this regularity is inside the spread. And it is not high.
And the fact that it appeared after the processing is interesting.
There is no perfect filter, this "noise" is +-1 pips, it's the distortion that occurs during processing, due to the fact that the resolution of the computer is finite, the filter is not perfect, etc., it's not noise in the original signal.
That's kind of what I was talking about. It's measurement noise (quantization and sampling noise) .
What does the "OM" universal sound symbolise. Enlightenment.
Piligrimm, will you allow it?
It's the noise of the universe that our normal senses don't allow through their filters. And at the same time the signal that the practitioner must emit in order to enter into stochastic spiritual resonance with the universe. Shudko :)
As for the loss of informativeness, you can use the ticks supplied by Reuters and other news agencies, this is not a stumbling block...
Completely agree with you. Regarding measurement errors, I added PS in my previous post. And concerning forecast errors - it must be, in my opinion, the subject of research, and criterion for trade decisions, and that random variable, to which statistical methods and exactly the Bayss approach should be applied. And not to price or returns - that's good for entering and that's after pre-processing. Prediction probabilities have a right to exist and everything that has already happened has probability equal to one.
MTS doesn't have to be implemented with neural networks so disliked by Prival, but we have to understand that it's not about filters (it's unclear what they separate from what), but about DataMining, clustering and other similar modern technologies of multivariate data analysis (I think Piligrimm mentioned MSUA here), that allow to identify latent patterns in time series.
In general, I have the feeling of a Lefty trying to make a point: "The English don't clean their guns with a brick!" :-)
I would love to help. But unfortunately I can't read MQL code as freely as MathCad where formulas are written the way we are used to seeing them in books. The only thing that seems to me (though I'm not sure) is using one of regression types, to make it clearer
There is a linear regression like y(x)=ax+b. You can calculate coefficients a and b in different ways, you can use ANC (seems not to be used there), and you can use recursion, but to understand it you need to clearly understand the loops (I get confused there, where, what, why is calculated). Most probably there is a non-linear regression, because there are some if() while calculating + type of regression equation itself is not clear, how many coefficients there are.
In general, almost all indicators can be considered as digital filters, the MA is a digital filter. The word adaptation usually means that some parameters (coefficients in the filter gut) have to change depending on the characteristics of the input signal. Therefore first of all I would refer AMA, FRAMA and similar adaptive digital filters (averaging parameter (n) changes depending on input process variance estimation), almost all FFT, wavelet filters that use threshold processing (trying to match TF parameters with a spectrum of input desired signal).
But SATL, FATL are not adaptive, because TF coefficients were calculated once at design stage to match the transient response of the filter with the spectrum of the input signal (AFR and IFR), and during operation these coefficients do not change. These are the so-called matched filters. But there is an ideal, what is called in DSP optimum filter, to build it is difficult, but possible. For this you need to know spectra of useful signal and noise.
I don't know, if I helped you or confused you :-), but in any case good luck.