I would add uneven balance sheet growth to the signs of fitting. I mean when 60%-80% of profits were generated by 2-5% of trades.
Please explain the words: "trading signals are calculated using formulas from externalneural networks or AI programs (usually they are kilometre long formulas with coefficients with a dozen decimal places like 1.28677263556*Open[i])".
Uh-huh. I agree with all the pp. With some on faith (haven't encountered it myself, but logical). I'm thinking of what to add.
You know, this could turn out to be an article. I'll think of a cleverer title... Here: "Apophatic Expert Writing." )))
Yes indeed, the Expert Advisor I have given out to practically everyone is just a rough draft of the main idea....
It had both errors in the code and algorithmic errors, after fixing them, the result is MUCH better, the idea makes sense!!! And I think that analyzing the indicators is stupid!!! Why analyze the derivative of price? instead of studying the price chart, and just Japanese candles bear the most information (depending on the TF).
At the expense of "the tester radically changes the growth curve of the balance and the result obtained when you change just a little bit of one parameter"
I say... on our (improved) TS tried to test on all sorts of parameters that differ from each other not by 10-20%, but at times!!!!
The worst result we got was the prof. 1,18 at 1044 transactions since 2008
and the best is already a secret )))
Please explain the words: "trading signals are calculated using formulas from external neural network or AI software (usually kilometre-long formulas with coefficients with a dozen decimal places like 1.28677263556*Open[i])"
it was like this
= (1.00002*IF(AND(0.00026974 <= 1*G2,1*G2 < 0.00026974 + 141.828),1/G2,0.121066)*G2*G2*G2-1.25485*IF(AND(0.00026974 <= 1*G2, 1*G2 < 0.00026974 + 141.828),1/G2,0.121066)*IF(AND(0.00026974 <= 1*G2, 1*G2 < 0.00026974 + 141.828),1/G2,0.121066)*G2*G2*G2)/(IF(AND(0.00026974 <= 1*G2, 1*G2 < 0.00026974 + 141.828),1/G2,0.121066)*G2*G2-1.25521*IF(AND(0.00026974 <= 1*G2, 1*G2 < 0.00026974 + 141.828),1/G2,0.121066)*G2+0.000389753-0.00000823394*IF(AND(0.00026974 <= 1*G2, 1*G2 < 0.00026974 + 141.828),1/G2,0.121066)*IF(AND(0.00026974 <= 1*G2, 1*G2 < 0.00026974 + 141.828),1/G2,0.121066))
Uh-huh. I agree with all the pp. With some on faith (haven't encountered it myself, but logical). Thinking of what to add.
You know,this could be an article. Let me think of a cleverer title... Here it is: "Apophatic Expert Writing." )))
Shit... wish I could get into a discussion with you.... But the condition is the same as what you had yesterday....
Apophatic hangover :) Anyway, I'm not fit for a vivid discussion today, sorry....
Yes indeed, the advisor I've pretty much given out to everyone is just a draft of the main idea....
this thread is not to criticise your work, it's just a thought provoking discussion - nothing personal.
this one's personal: don't go all "i got a little something" on me.
I'll say... on our (improved) TS tried to test on all sorts of parameters that differ from each other not by 10-20%, but at times!!!!
The worst result we got was the prof. 1,18 at 1044 transactions since 2008
and the best is already a secret ))))
You should not read that on a forum where people are looking for help and support. >>) : it's unseemly to read on a forum where people are looking for help and support. if it's a real secret - why whistle about it ;) otherwise it might turn out that you just haven't got all the clues yet.
Shit... i wish i could get into a discussion with you.... but it's the same condition you were in yesterday....
Apophatic hangover :) Anyway, I'm not fit for a vivid discussion today, sorry....
))) Yeah. I understand. I was disappointed we didn't get a shot back from the moon myself yesterday - it was so hard.
Apophatic means "through negation". That is, the expert is NOT ...
Regarding the ForexTools advisor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKRYFVcPv5E
Regarding the ForexTools advisor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKRYFVcPv5E
Zato breeding!!!!
Of course, you can giggle all you want. But the only criterion for the correctness of theory is practice. Real life. ;)
You'd better think of something useful to add to your first post...
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use
After the excitement in the "Who needs JAPAN CHANGES? I tried to systematize my criteria for assessing the correctness of this or that trading system and the Expert Advisor built on it. Here is a brief summary of my rules that came to my mind.
Signs of fitting:
joo: This function approximation is one application of neural networks. Applied to use in EAs is a fit.
Logical errors in algorithms:
Low amount of trades on the period under test
goldtrader: tests with a number of trades below a few hundred are virtually unreliable:
- up to 100 trades: fthopu adnistratsiya ("unsatisfactory"),
- up to 300 trades: already something ("satisfactory"),
- up to 600 trades: good ("good"),
- over 800 trades: trustworthy ("excellent").
External bans:
I would be glad if this list is supplemented by your rules, backed up by practical experience of real trading.
As long as I have access to edit this post I will move all sensible criteria into it.
All that was (from my point of view) sensible - collected in this post. Unfortunately, at about 5-th page substantive communication (as usual) ended and 6th went empty crap .... but since the 15th page they seem to have returned to the topic...