Determine the future operability of the vehicle. - page 4

New comment
 
That's it, LeoV is not allowed into Cosmos, 100g is not poured, and most importantly: the weight is not given in his hands.
 

Nah, it's not really a kergudu joke, Leonid. The kettlebell has not only gravitational but also inertial mass (they're sort of equivalent), and it's no easier to squeeze than it is to squeeze. Well, in short, the principle of equivalence of masses be damned...

P.S. In principle, I didn't think this principle had anything to do with the market myself, but I started thinking that way about 12 years ago.

 
The Earth Experiment - flywheel exercises with weights.
 

Here we go )))) I gave just as an example - in general, not in detail. It does not have to be perfectly similar to the market situation. It is just an example. Every situation has its nuances and that is understandable. Why bother with the minutiae? )))) You fix your feet and lift 10 000 kg in space - ))))

Would you tell us better how you determine the serviceability of TC in the future?

 
to start with, minimise the number of trims. Ideally, one tap is Winter/Summer/Autumn.
 
Korey писал (а) >>
to start with, minimise the number of fitting parameters. Ideally one tap - Winter/Summer/Autumn.

I certainly agree with that. Minimising the number of variables. But it does not determine the performance of TC in the future - it is one of the tricks of avoiding overoptimization, from fitting. But here we optimized, made a test for RP - how to determine the TC performance in the future according to those statistics, which was given to us by MT at these two sites?

 

1 var.
Manually on the D1 W1 training area as much as possible to collect patterns, and then compare with what reappears.
A different market pattern in the "art" perception is an alarm signal for readjustment.
It is advisable to have blanks on different patterns.
2 var.
-Create a market stable system that works without adjustments. The sign of such TS - continuous profitability in a wide range of parameters.
3var.

3 If profitability over a range of parameters is discontinuous, then the system is dangerous (to one degree or another).
-It is possible to estimate the number of Holes.
For example, at one TS the parameter P gives profit in the range between 1 and 100 && there are three sections of loss with the total length of 40.
At another TS the parameter Z is profitable in the extreme points 0.001 and 0.09. Between them there are 42 loss areas with the total length 0.05.
Intuitively it is clear that the second system is more dangerous than the first one, and much more dependent on the market, i.e. more unstable in the future.

 

Also understandable. But that's not exactly what I'm asking. These are the principles of building an un-optimized TS, preferably without optimization. And I am trying to find out how to determine the capability of the TS in the future from reports from the period of optimization and from the OOS period.

 
I look at the quantity and quality of humpback on the growth graph, this is inextricably linked to sustainability in the future.
looking for unproblematic TCs that are not scary.
 
Korey писал (а) >>
I'm looking at the quantity and quality of the hump on the growth chart, it's inextricably linked to stability in the future.
>> I'm looking for unproblematic TSs that are not scary.

Well, for example, there is an unproblematic, non-intimidating TS on an optimisation period. How do I know how it will behave on the real account? After all, it is not the fact that it (TS) will behave the same way during the optimization period. Not a fact at all.

12345678910
New comment